I'm completely delinquent on doing this. It's been a busy couple of months. It's still my intention On Apr 17, 2013, at 9:54 AM, Nathan Hüsken wrote:

Hey,

is there any response regarding acceptance of the app yet? Also I wonder, what size does the app have? I compiled a simple hello world app for android, and size is about 1MB. This could be related to SplitObjs not working for android ...

Regards, nathan

On 03/03/2013 02:10 AM, Robert Lorentz wrote:

...

Hi Jan thanks for the email. I'm replying to the list because it was a good question

Of course the actual warnings wouldn't end up in a binary. However, the warnings are due to using linker options regarding disabling relocate-able code I believe (if I recall correctly - it's been a few weeks..).

The resulting code works on devices - that is a fact. However, it is strongly advised to NOT use that linker option. This is evidenced by Apple docs I have seen (sorry no references handy) - and the fact that the compiler/linker complains when you use that linker option.

This is enough of "gray area" that I am not 100% convinced that an app would be accepted. I understand that there is static analysis done automatically on apps being reviewed. (No reference). This analysis could potentially find that the linked binary had been created in such a manner and reject it

What you say about the Haskell vs C source is true EXCEPT that the Haskell runtime must be compiled with these specific options. Generally speaking - it's a bug that the runtime can't just be compiled "normally". It can be fixed. But as far as I have heard from luke and Stephen they aren't working on it. So there's risk there by choosing to use this GHC iOS

Things may be different than they were when I tried GHC iOS (December or November I think). I'm sure there are errors in some things I'm writing here, GHC iOS is a very casual thing for me, I'm barely involved and by no means am I trying to come across as someone that knows what's going on! I am very interested in seeing it succeed though

I'm 90% sure the App Store would accept with no problems. But it's easy enough to try to be more certain. I will submit an app this week using GHC iOS and will report back to the group

On Mar 2, 2013, at 7:29 PM, Jan Greve <0x4034e61@googlemail.com> wrote:

...

Hi Robert,

Why exactly would linking warnings pop up in an app store review? Those are not traceable in a binary. Also, it seems like the App Store approval is based on "look and feel", rather then good coding style. Even Apps with memory leaks are permitted sometimes - and that is something one can detect easily by using instruments alongside the functional testing.

Plus, I don't see how a Haskell-sourced arm binary would differ from a C-based one. Thus, theoretically there should be no problem getting an App approved for the App Store that uses a Library written in Haskell.

Cheers, Jan Greve

Am 27.02.2013 um 17:41 schrieb Robert Lorentz :

...

Curious if this would be approved in the App Store especially with respect to the warnings you get when linking. Has anyone succeeded?

I would be willing to do this exercise with one of my apps (simply put in a rev that adds the hello world type example) - but if someone else has done it I won't waste my time _______________________________________________ iPhone mailing list iPhone@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/iphone

_______________________________________________ iPhone mailing list iPhone@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/iphone

_______________________________________________ iPhone mailing list iPhone@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/iphone