On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 10:06 PM, John Meacham
Hi, could you re-record all of your patches dealing with getting instances of function to work as a single patch with the finished result? (just the jhc changes, not the library ones)
I sent multiple patches about (->)? I was pretty sure I had just sent the one... that one that removes a case from that ki function was purely cosmetic.
Also, if you arn't already, running the regression suite between every change to the type system is good. (perl regress/regress.prl) will do that. That suite really needs to be fleshed out actually, I will probably add some of the more problematic nobench programs to it.
Okay.
Is the arrows package available seperately from ghc? if so, I would rather have it be a separate library and not in 'base' for jhc.. perhaps we should do something like we do for the haskell98 package, have the user pull down that darcs repo and just include appropriate 'cabal' files in the jhc repo, that might be a better long term solution.
Er, well, there is an arrow[s] package, but Control.Arrow is apparantly in base, along with all of those others. I suppose we could stick it in some other package for JHC's purposes. Really, I just want to be able to compile the collections package... because then I can instantiate Set as a (bounded below) lattice in my test code for class aliases ;-).