
I'm getting the error mentioned in the subject, but without any indication where in my file this error occurs. What does this mean? Thanks, Peter

On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 8:30 PM, Peter Verswyvelen
I'm getting the error mentioned in the subject, but without any indication where in my file this error occurs. What does this mean? Thanks, Peter
It means exactly that - something in that file's comments is causing Haddock to choke. It could be using '*' inside some --s, it could be something else. Haddock won't really say. Your best bet is the old bisect/binary-search method: remove half the comments & retry, narrowing it down until you've found the offending line and then character. Then you can either remove it or read the Haddock manual and see what the right thing looks like. -- gwern

Ouch, with all the great Haskell parsers like Parsec around I think I was
expecting a line/column number :-)
But I see a ticket is already open for this
http://trac.haskell.org/haddock/ticket/83
http://trac.haskell.org/haddock/ticket/83On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 2:47 AM,
Gwern Branwen
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 8:30 PM, Peter Verswyvelen
wrote: I'm getting the error mentioned in the subject, but without any indication where in my file this error occurs. What does this mean? Thanks, Peter
It means exactly that - something in that file's comments is causing Haddock to choke. It could be using '*' inside some --s, it could be something else. Haddock won't really say. Your best bet is the old bisect/binary-search method: remove half the comments & retry, narrowing it down until you've found the offending line and then character. Then you can either remove it or read the Haddock manual and see what the right thing looks like.
-- gwern

2009/8/26 Peter Verswyvelen
Ouch, with all the great Haskell parsers like Parsec around I think I was expecting a line/column number :-) But I see a ticket is already open for this http://trac.haskell.org/haddock/ticket/83
Yes, and the line-number part of that ticket has been fixed in 2.4.2 and higher versions. So the best idea is to upgrade Haddock. David

Oh, I just installed the Haskell platform.
I have
Haddock version 2.4.2, (c) Simon Marlow 2006
Ported to use the GHC API by David Waern 2006-2008
But I noticed that my bad comments were in the description of the cabal
file, not the source file.
So that might be a new ticket?
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 1:04 PM, David Waern
2009/8/26 Peter Verswyvelen
: Ouch, with all the great Haskell parsers like Parsec around I think I was expecting a line/column number :-) But I see a ticket is already open for this http://trac.haskell.org/haddock/ticket/83
Yes, and the line-number part of that ticket has been fixed in 2.4.2 and higher versions. So the best idea is to upgrade Haddock.
David

2009/8/26 Peter Verswyvelen
Oh, I just installed the Haskell platform. I have Haddock version 2.4.2, (c) Simon Marlow 2006 Ported to use the GHC API by David Waern 2006-2008 But I noticed that my bad comments were in the description of the cabal file, not the source file. So that might be a new ticket?
My guess is that Cabal passes the description via the --prologue flag and Haddock doesn't print which file it was passed. I'll fix this for the next release, you don't have to file a ticket. Thanks, David
participants (3)
-
David Waern
-
Gwern Branwen
-
Peter Verswyvelen