Excellent, thanks. Once you've committed this, it seems like there should be potential for haskell scripts to be used in some of the same situations as e.g. perl scripts. Is 'runhaskell' supposed to be a standard handle to a working haskell interpreter, e.g. possibly runhugs or runnhc? Should people put '#!/usr/bin/env runhaskell' at the top of scripts? Frederik On Mon, May 16, 2005 at 03:52:51PM +0100, Simon Marlow wrote:
I'm working on this. It's not trivial because GHC assumes all over the place that the suffix on a file determines how it should be compiled, but I've now implemented something similar to gcc's -x flag.
Cheers, Simon
On 14 May 2005 20:04, Frederik Eaton wrote:
(moving to a separate thread)
Also, how hard would it be to make it so that runghc doesn't require script file names to end with ".hs"? Some people like to keep their executable names language-neutral.
Frederik
On Wed, May 11, 2005 at 10:55:03AM +0100, Simon Marlow wrote:
On 11 May 2005 07:37, Frederik Eaton wrote:
It looks like runghc is exiting with status 0 if there is a problem. Shouldn't this be non-zero?
$ runghc -V The Glorious Glasgow Haskell Compilation System, version 6.4 $ runghc /dev/null; echo $? Could not find module `/dev/null': use -v to see a list of the files searched for (one of the roots of the dependency analysis)
<interactive>:1:76: Failed to load interface for `Main': Could not find module `Main': it is not a module in the current program, or in any known package. 0
It turns out I fixed this bug after 6.4, but later the fix was accidentally reverted. So thanks for reporting this again, it'll work properly in 6.4.1.
Cheers, Simon
_______________________________________________ Glasgow-haskell-bugs mailing list Glasgow-haskell-bugs@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-bugs