darcs patch: [PROOF OF CONCEPT] build readline package with libedit

[Robert Dockins]

On Tuesday 19 February 2008 09:22:34 am Christian Maeder wrote:
> Duncan Coutts wrote:
> > On Tue, 2008-02-19 at 12:01 +0100, Henning Thielemann wrote:
> >> On Tue, 19 Feb 2008, Christian Maeder wrote:
> >>> In order to avoid several #ifdefs (maybe differently or suboptimal
> >>> given) in user sources (to achieve 1.) such #ifdefs (or wrappers)
> >>> should be part of the libraries (including the documentation for the
> >>> license differences)!
> >>
> >> Can Cabal-1.2's flag capability manage such a task?
> >
> > I don't think I understand the problem clearly enough to say. Perhaps
> > someone can try explaining it in more detail.
>
> Currently, we have packages Shellac-readline and Shellac-editline.
> with
>
> exposed-modules: System.Console.Shell.Backend.Readline
>
> resp.
>
> exposed-modules: System.Console.Shell.Backend.Editline
>
> Each module exports a single constant:
>
> Prelude> :browse System.Console.Shell.Backend.Editline
> editlineBackend :: System.Console.Shell.Backend.ShellBackend ()
> Prelude> :browse System.Console.Shell.Backend.Readline
> readlineBackend :: System.Console.Shell.Backend.ShellBackend ()
>
> On Macs I want to use Editline, under Linux Readline, Therefore I #ifdef
> my sources. (The functionality seems to be the same for both packages)
>
> My questions are:
>
> 1. Should not the exported constants have the same name
> 2. Should not even the module name be the same in both packages

I don't think so.  I personally view such "top level" overloading as 
undesirable.  There might possibly be a legitimate reason to want both 
modules avaliable simultaneously.  Punning the module name would make that 
impossible.

If you want a package that multiplexes the editline package or the readline 
package depending on avaliability, that would be easy to do.  It would just 
require wraping up the #ifdef stuff needed into a single place.  I can 
probably find a few minutes this afternoon/evening to do this.

> As long as not both packages are installed the compiler would pick the
> proper package without my #ifdefs.
>
> HTH Christian