Ross Paterson ross at
Wed Oct 20 13:17:23 EDT 2004

On Wed, Oct 20, 2004 at 05:26:23PM +0200, Sven Panne wrote:
> If you mean "everyone happy with a LGPL", then I would agree. But GHC and
> Hugs use a BSD-style license, so cpphs is not an option for them. After
> some googling and testing I found MCPP (,
> which is a highly configurable preprocessor with a small footprint and a
> BSD license. Shipping this as an internal tool with GHC 6.4 and the next
> Hugs release (especially for use with the hugs-package tool) should be
> possible, I see what I can do...

Do we really want to get into the packaging business?  I'm not sure about
Ketil's setup, but I don't think that gcc -traditional has broken Haskell
yet (except for \ at end of line).  They may do it tomorrow, of course,
but then some of us already have mcpp, and others can get it.

> P.S.: Ross, any schedule for a Hugs release yet?

Ah.  As usual, we could to a Unix release tomorrow, but Windows needs
a bit of work, and who's going to do that?

I also think the next Hugs release should support HGL/SOE on Windows
(currently X11 only), but there's something wrong with the graphics
part of the new Win32 package and I'm not in a position to fix it.
(Fixing that would make Win32 and HGL available to GHC too, and the
last of hslibs deprecable.)

After that, we'll have to start asking Sigbjorn nicely.

More information about the Libraries mailing list