[Haskell-cafe] Literate haskell format unclear (implementation and specification inconsistencies)

Ross Paterson ross at soi.city.ac.uk
Sat Mar 3 07:43:41 EST 2007

On Fri, Mar 02, 2007 at 01:46:38AM +0000, Ian Lynagh wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 28, 2007 at 05:48:09PM -0500, Isaac Dupree wrote:
> > Trying to implement literate haskell[*], I realized several
> > ways in which the correct behavior for unliterating (especially with
> > regard to errors) was unclear.  I have several cases which ghc, hugs
> > and Haskell 98 have differing opinions on!  The Report as it stands
> > is far from a clear and complete specification (and I didn't find
> > anything in the Haskell' wiki/trac about literate haskell).
> Hmm, some of this came up around the time the revised report was being
> written:
> http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell/2001-December/008549.html
> http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell/2001-December/008550.html
> but oddly doesn't seem to have been clarified in the report. We should
> definitely make sure that Haskell' does so!

Or perhaps we should get rid of \begin{code} and \end{code}, before
someone proposes <code> and </code>.

More information about the Haskell-Cafe mailing list