cpphs (was Re: Haskell on Red Hat Enterprise...)

Andy Moran moran at galois.com
Thu Mar 17 13:22:51 EST 2005

Malcolm Wallace wrote:

>>Have we converged on a long-term solution for this problem? Is hscpp 
>>ready for the job?
> I believe cpphs is in good shape.  There has been one bug report, and
> no new feature requests, in the last 4 months since 0.8 was released,
> with 235 downloads of that version.  Over a slightly longer period,
> it has been used internally by hmake and nhc98 in preference to cpp,
> with no visible problems.
> With the attached compatibility script, it is largely possible to use
> cpphs as a drop-in replacement for cpp.  (The script just translates
> the command-line argument format.)  e.g.
>     ghc -cpp -pgmP cpphs.compat ....
> works as expected.

I notice that cpphs understands CPP stringification (if invoked with 
--hashes). Most of the gcc 3.4 failures (in fact, all of that I've seen) 
have to do with fooling -traditional into turning macro constants into 
Haskell strings, which can more readily be done with the #-operator. So, 
would using cpphs mean would could do away with the string gap hack?

> The only real issue currently preventing ghc from adopting cpphs is
> ideological (GPL licensing).
> 		http://haskell.org/cpphs/

What implications does the LGPL have for a GHC binary that was built 
using  cpphs, if the GHC binary were used solely within an organization 
(i.e. not distributed)? What if cpphs were distributed with such a GHC 
binary as an executable?


Andy Moran                                      Ph. (503) 626 6616, x113
Galois Connections Inc.                              Fax. (503) 350 0833
12725 SW Millikan Way, Suite #290                  http://www.galois.com
Beaverton, OR 97005                                     moran at galois.com

More information about the Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list