So, barring this, I'm curious how other people handle this issue. I have multiple projects. Call them A, B, C. They are in directories: ~/projects/A ~/projects/B ~/projects/C repsectively. Say I'm creating a new project, D, in ~/projects/D that uses code that I've written in packages A, B and C. Now, as far as I can see, I have two options: 1) Copy all the .(l)hs files from /A, /B, and /C to /D that I need to import 2) Include projects/A, projects/B and projects/C in my search path for ghc(i) I hate both of these options. 1 is terrible because I have multiple copies of the same code lying around and, if I make changes to one, I have to remember to copy the changes over to the others. 2 is a big nuisance, especially since ghc (seems to) lack an environment variable that it looks at to get command line options every time it runs (HUGSFLAGS, I think it was for Hugs). So is there a third option that I'm missing? How do other people handle this issue? - Hal On Wed, 10 Oct 2001, Mark Carroll wrote:
On Wed, 10 Oct 2001, Hal Daume III wrote: (snip)
least) is that the Java compiler knows how to interpret the "."s and will use them to navigate directory structure. (snip)
Yes, that's certainly an interesting idea. I'd like to fall short of mandating anything about location of source files in any language spec, though: although I can see that people probably find Java's imposed semantics useful, personally I find them irritating and wouldn't want to shackle everyone to them.
-- Mark
_______________________________________________ Haskell mailing list Haskell@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Hal Daume III hal@cmu.edu "arrest this man, he talks in maths" www.andrew.cmu.edu/~hcd ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~