Re: [ANNOUNCE] Shaking up GHC

I mean, it would be nice if ghc --make was reimplemented using Shake, but there are a few problems (most notably the use of .shake metadata store) which make it hard to be bug-for-bug compatible with the old make. Edward Excerpts from Ben Gamari's message of 2016-01-23 10:45:50 -0800:

Tuncer Ayaz writes:

...

On 23 January 2016 at 18:16, Herbert Valerio Riedel wrote:

...

On 2016-01-23 at 17:58:12 +0100, Tuncer Ayaz wrote:

[...]

...

My suggestion, and what I'd expect, is to make Shake part of GHC's included lib, just like process or xhtml.

please don't; the only reason we include process and xhtml because we *have* to. The less we *have* to bundle, the better.

If there's a good way in 8.x (with new Cabal and Shake) to avoid bundling, while using Shake for ghc --make, then I'm all for it. My concern is that it has to be as simple as it's currently to install ghc on a random Linux distro, in order for someone to use a Shakefile. I want more Shakefile users :).

I'm not sure I follow. Edward's --make support is a front-end plugin; as far as I know there has been no discussion of shipping it with GHC-proper. It merely makes use of the new front-end plugin facility. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding something here?

Cheers,

- Ben