On Fri, 2007-11-23 at 14:59 -0500, Alex Jacobson wrote:
Cabal is not a solution to this problem because
1. you want your code to work via ghci and runhaskell and perhaps via searchpath.
2. you may want to move a module from one package to another and you don't want to have to examine the cabal file to figure out how to do that. The source file should have enough information.
I agree. I'd prefer to see the extensions field in the .cabal be just the union of the ones specified in LANGUAGE pragmas in the source files and not have the meaning of applying those extensions. So I'd like to see it become a declaration to the outside world about what extensions are needed to compile the package, not a way of applying extensions to all modules in the package. In practise for backwards compatibility we'll have to have both for the time being. Duncan