RE: Summary of progress
On Sun, Mar 11, 2001 at 01:28:38PM +0000, Malcolm Wallace wrote:
Proposal 2b: adopt a "Std." namespace for libraries that are common to all implementations.
* There is little agreement here. Simon M, Manuel, and others have expressed their doubts that it is workable. No-one has defended the idea except me. But then Simon posted a hierarchy layout proposal in which "Haskell." seemed to take the role of "Std.". So I'm a bit confused. I'd like to see some more discussion about this.
Oh, here's another thought: if we standardise the locations of as many libraries as possible, then it becomes reasonable for a compiler to do this: $ nhc foo.hs nhc: module `Foo' imports `Lang.Concurrent', which is a Haskell language extension not supported by this compiler. $ ghc bar.hs ghc: module `Bar' imports `Graphics.UI.Gtk' which is not installed. It may be obtained from "http://www.foo.bar.com". Cheers, Simon
Simon Marlow wrote:
Oh, here's another thought: if we standardise the locations of as many libraries as possible, then it becomes reasonable for a compiler to do this:
$ nhc foo.hs nhc: module `Foo' imports `Lang.Concurrent', which is a Haskell language extension not supported by this compiler.
$ ghc bar.hs ghc: module `Bar' imports `Graphics.UI.Gtk' which is not installed. It may be obtained from "http://www.foo.bar.com".
Yes, it looks attractive. Basically it would require a database of library/distribution info - which ideally should be compiler independent. Regards, Malcolm
participants (2)
-
Malcolm Wallace -
Simon Marlow