[Haskell] reasons for non-portability

[Wolfgang Jeltsch]

Am Montag, 22. März 2004 12:46 schrieben Sie:
> > Am Sonntag, 21. März 2004 12:36 schrieben Sie:
> > > Wolfgang Jeltsch wrote:
> > > > [...] My question is, if a module is considered non-portable only if
> > > > it contains non-portable constructs itself, or if a module is also
> > > > non-portable if it just imports a module which is non-portable.
> > >
> > > Both, otherwise stating the property "portable" wouldn't help very
> > > much.
> >
> > Well, I discovered that ghci is able to load modules without the
> > -fglasgow-exts option even if they rely on non-portable modules from the
> > hierarchical libraries (like, e.g., Control.Monad.Reader).
>
> Ultimately, *every* module depends on non-portable modules - somewhere
> it all has to come down to primitives, and these are wired into each
> compiler in some magic way.

But then Sven Panne's comment would mean that every module has to be 
documented as non-portable.

> --KW 8-)

Wolfgang