18 Jul
2015
18 Jul
'15
8:14 p.m.
On Sat, Jul 18, 2015, at 09:47 AM, Dimitri DeFigueiredo wrote:
I don't like it, though. Having a build fail because of changes made to another target is counter-intuitive to me. I don't understand your argument for why the current behavior is a good thing. It seems we would be extending so called "cabal hell" to within targets in a package if we were to change this? I do wish there were other options here.
Yes, that's exactly right - it would be another way to end up in cabal hell. There is another option, though: you could put the executables in separate packages. -Karl