Cabal: Conditional code and dependencies

[Ian Lynagh]

On Thu, Jul 21, 2005 at 11:59:41AM +0100, Malcolm Wallace wrote:
> "Simon Marlow" <simonmar at microsoft.com> writes:
> 
> Intuitively, I think many people use this formula:
> 
>     read . take 3 . filter isDigit . (++"000")
> 
> So version numbers would translate roughly like:
> 
> 	1	100
> 	1.0	100
> 	1.1	110
> 	1.1.1	111
> 	1.1.2	112
> 	1.12	112
> 	1.12.1	112
> 
> Although this is ambiguous, my feeling is that in projects using
> major.minor.smaller, the minor number tends not to rise above 9,
> and conversely, if a project's minor number rises above 9, it tends
> only to use two levels of numbering not three.

Doesn't that make 1.9 > 1.10 whereas I think the opposite is true with
cabal?


Thanks
Ian