pgj-freebsd-amd64-stable (amd64 FreeBSD STABLE), build 128, Success

2011-01-10 Thread Builder
pgj-freebsd-amd64-stable (amd64 FreeBSD STABLE), build 128 Build succeeded Details: http://darcs.haskell.org/ghcBuilder/builders/pgj-freebsd-amd64-stable/128.html darcs checkout | Success create mk/build.mk | Success get subrepos | Success repo versions| Success setting v

pgj-freebsd-i386-stable (x86 FreeBSD STABLE), build 111, Success

2011-01-10 Thread Builder
pgj-freebsd-i386-stable (x86 FreeBSD STABLE), build 111 Build succeeded Details: http://darcs.haskell.org/ghcBuilder/builders/pgj-freebsd-i386-stable/111.html darcs checkout | Success create mk/build.mk | Success get subrepos | Success repo versions| Success setting versi

[nightly] 10-Jan-2011 build of STABLE on i386-unknown-linux (cam-02-unx)

2011-01-10 Thread GHC Build Reports
Build description = STABLE on i386-unknown-linux (cam-02-unx) Build location= /playpen/simonmar/nightly/STABLE Build config file = /home/simonmar/nightly/site/msrc/conf-STABLE-cam-02-unx Nightly build started on cam-02-unx at Mon Jan 10 18:10:02 GMT 2011. checking out new source tree

pgj2 (amd64 FreeBSD HEAD), build 246, Success

2011-01-10 Thread Builder
pgj2 (amd64 FreeBSD HEAD), build 246 Build succeeded Details: http://darcs.haskell.org/ghcBuilder/builders/pgj2/246.html darcs checkout | Success create mk/build.mk | Success get subrepos | Success repo versions| Success setting version date | Success booting

Re: RFC: migrating to git

2011-01-10 Thread Manuel M T Chakravarty
I agree with Roman's position. I would prefer to stay with darcs (it has its advantages and disadvantages, but has definitely been improving much in the past). In any case, all of GHC including all dependencies must be available and patchable with a *single* VCS. Mixing VCS' will lead to madn

Re: RFC: migrating to git

2011-01-10 Thread David Terei
On 10 January 2011 22:19, Simon Marlow wrote: > We're intrested in opinions from both active and potential GHC > developers/contributors.  Let us know what you think - would this make life > harder or easier for you?  Would it make you less likely or more likely to > contribute? I would really li

tn23 (x86 OSX HEAD), build 239, Success

2011-01-10 Thread Builder
tn23 (x86 OSX HEAD), build 239 Build succeeded Details: http://darcs.haskell.org/ghcBuilder/builders/tn23/239.html darcs checkout | Success create mk/build.mk | Success get subrepos | Success repo versions| Success setting version date | Success booting | Succ

pgj (x86 FreeBSD HEAD), build 248, Success

2011-01-10 Thread Builder
pgj (x86 FreeBSD HEAD), build 248 Build succeeded Details: http://darcs.haskell.org/ghcBuilder/builders/pgj/248.html darcs checkout | Success create mk/build.mk | Success get subrepos | Success repo versions| Success setting version date | Success booting | Su

simonmar-win32-head (x86 Windows HEAD), build 212, Failure

2011-01-10 Thread Builder
simonmar-win32-head (x86 Windows HEAD), build 212 Build failed Details: http://darcs.haskell.org/ghcBuilder/builders/simonmar-win32-head/212.html darcs checkout | Success create mk/build.mk | Success get subrepos | Success repo versions| Success setting version date | Suc

simonmar-win32-stable (x86 Windows STABLE), build 147, Failure

2011-01-10 Thread Builder
simonmar-win32-stable (x86 Windows STABLE), build 147 Build failed Details: http://darcs.haskell.org/ghcBuilder/builders/simonmar-win32-stable/147.html darcs checkout | Success create mk/build.mk | Success get subrepos | Success repo versions| Success setting version date

mbolingbroke (x86 OSX HEAD), build 52, Success

2011-01-10 Thread Builder
mbolingbroke (x86 OSX HEAD), build 52 Build succeeded Details: http://darcs.haskell.org/ghcBuilder/builders/mbolingbroke/52.html darcs checkout | Success create mk/build.mk | Success get subrepos | Success repo versions| Success setting version date | Success booting

[nightly] 10-Jan-2011 build of STABLE on x86_64-unknown-linux (cam-04-unx)

2011-01-10 Thread GHC Build Reports
Build description = STABLE on x86_64-unknown-linux (cam-04-unx) Build location= /64playpen/simonmar/nightly/STABLE-cam-04-unx Build config file = /home/simonmar/nightly/site/msrc/conf-STABLE-cam-04-unx Nightly build started on cam-04-unx at Mon Jan 10 18:10:01 GMT 2011. checking out new s

Re: RFC: migrating to git

2011-01-10 Thread David Peixotto
On Jan 10, 2011, at 5:19 AM, Simon Marlow wrote: > > We're intrested in opinions from both active and potential GHC > developers/contributors. Let us know what you think - would this make life > harder or easier for you? Would it make you less likely or more likely to > contribute? +1 for mo

Re: RFC: migrating to git

2011-01-10 Thread Thomas Schilling
I just want to point out that since the last discussion we collected some migration advice at http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/GitForDarcsUsers Some of it may be untested (or wrong), but it should be a good starting point. On 10 January 2011 22:15, Neil Mitchell wrote: >> As another non-

Re: RFC: migrating to git

2011-01-10 Thread Neil Mitchell
> As another non-GHC contributor, my opinion should probably also count for > little, but my experience with git has been poor. > > I have used git daily in my job for the last year.  Like Simon PJ, I > struggle to understand the underlying model of git, despite reading quite a > few tutorials.  I

Re: Mercurial? Re: RFC: migrating to git

2011-01-10 Thread Bryan O'Sullivan
On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 5:34 AM, Pavel Perikov wrote: > Please please consider Mercurial if migration from darcs is inevitable :) > For what it's worth, Mercurial generally interoperates quite well with git and github, using the hg-git plugin. As a longtime Mercurial user and an occasional GHC c

Re: RFC: migrating to git

2011-01-10 Thread Roman Leshchinskiy
On 10/01/2011, at 13:27, Simon Marlow wrote: > On 10/01/2011 13:02, Max Bolingbroke wrote: >> However, I remember the last time this came up there were some issues >> that might make migration painful. From the top of my head: >> >> 1) Some people expressed concern that they would have to use two

[nightly] 10-Jan-2011 build of HEAD on i386-unknown-linux (cam-02-unx)

2011-01-10 Thread GHC Build Reports
Build description = HEAD on i386-unknown-linux (cam-02-unx) Build location= /playpen/simonmar/nightly/HEAD Build config file = /home/simonmar/nightly/site/msrc/conf-HEAD-cam-02-unx Nightly build started on cam-02-unx at Mon Jan 10 18:00:02 GMT 2011. checking out new source tree

[nightly] 10-Jan-2011 build of HEAD on x86_64-unknown-linux (cam-04-unx)

2011-01-10 Thread GHC Build Reports
Build description = HEAD on x86_64-unknown-linux (cam-04-unx) Build location= /64playpen/simonmar/nightly/HEAD-cam-04-unx Build config file = /home/simonmar/nightly/site/msrc/conf-HEAD-cam-04-unx Nightly build started on cam-04-unx at Mon Jan 10 18:00:02 GMT 2011. checking out new source

Re: RFC: migrating to git

2011-01-10 Thread Malcolm Wallace
On 10 Jan 2011, at 14:02, Gregory Collins wrote: +1. I don't have a lot of skin in this particular game (I'm not currently a GHC contributor and am unlikely to become one in the near future), but I can offer some anecdotal evidence: As another non-GHC contributor, my opinion should probably als

Re: Mercurial? Re: RFC: migrating to git

2011-01-10 Thread Johan Tibell
On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 5:08 PM, Pavel Perikov wrote: > Probably most valuable are the opinions of GHC development team of course :) > Git really seem to be more popular, Mercurial just seem more streamlined to > me :) Their preference if of course very important, but they partly wanted to make

Re: RFC: migrating to git

2011-01-10 Thread Thomas Schilling
I'd be for a move, but haven't contributed much lately. I use Git for all my personal projects, so I consider Git to be useful. I personally find sending patches via Git to be harder than with Darcs, but if we use Github the pull-request-based model should work well. I used Git on Windows two ye

Re: Mercurial? Re: RFC: migrating to git

2011-01-10 Thread Johan Tibell
On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 2:43 PM, Pavel Perikov wrote: > > On 10.01.2011, at 16:40, Johan Tibell wrote: >> While Mercurial is a fine choice, I think there are more Haskellers >> that use Git than Mercurial. Probably because GitHub is such an >> awesome service. > > Interesting. It will be great to

Re: RFC: migrating to git

2011-01-10 Thread Daniel Peebles
I fully support this (especially if it lived on github), but we should probably sort the top contributors to GHC in the past year or so and consider their opinions on the matter in that order :) I certainly would not be on that list. A git(hub)-based workflow would however facilitate any minor cont

Re: RFC: migrating to git

2011-01-10 Thread Gregory Collins
On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 2:38 PM, Johan Tibell wrote: >> Ultimately I'm quite concerned with keeping GHC HQ happy (as you guys >> do the lions share of the work!). I feel we should only make the >> switch if the most frequent committers (i.e. Simon, Simon and Ian) are >> *totally happy* with it and

Re: RFC: migrating to git

2011-01-10 Thread Lars Viklund
On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 01:27:17PM +, Simon Marlow wrote: > On 10/01/2011 13:02, Max Bolingbroke wrote: >> 2) There was also concern that Git isn't so great on Windows. I have >> heard that this is less of an issue now, but I never personally >> suffered from any problems, so can't be sure. (FW

Re: Mercurial? Re: RFC: migrating to git

2011-01-10 Thread Johan Tibell
On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 2:34 PM, Pavel Perikov wrote: > Please please consider Mercurial if migration from darcs is inevitable :) While Mercurial is a fine choice, I think there are more Haskellers that use Git than Mercurial. Probably because GitHub is such an awesome service. Johan __

Re: RFC: migrating to git

2011-01-10 Thread Johan Tibell
On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 2:02 PM, Max Bolingbroke wrote: > Naturally other workflows are possible and I'm sure other list members > will chime in with their own favourites :-) Here's the flow I use: http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/ with the exception of having the master b

Re: RFC: migrating to git

2011-01-10 Thread Johan Tibell
On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 12:19 PM, Simon Marlow wrote: > We're intrested in opinions from both active and potential GHC > developers/contributors.  Let us know what you think - would this make life > harder or easier for you?  Would it make you less likely or more likely to > contribute? I would a

Re: RFC: migrating to git

2011-01-10 Thread Simon Marlow
On 10/01/2011 13:02, Max Bolingbroke wrote: On 10 January 2011 11:19, Simon Marlow wrote: Let us know what you think - would this make life harder or easier for you? Would it make you less likely or more likely to contribute? Well, as a sometime-contributor I would certainly be happier hacki

Re: RFC: migrating to git

2011-01-10 Thread Max Bolingbroke
On 10 January 2011 11:19, Simon Marlow wrote: > Let us know what you think - would this make life > harder or easier for you?  Would it make you less likely or more likely to > contribute? Well, as a sometime-contributor I would certainly be happier hacking on GHC if it were git based. When worki

Re: pgj-freebsd-amd64-stable (amd64 FreeBSD STABLE), build 125, Success

2011-01-10 Thread Simon Marlow
On 08/01/2011 08:12, Builder wrote: OVERALL SUMMARY for test run started at Sat Jan 8 07:56:24 UTC 2011 2670 total tests, which gave rise to 14862 test cases, of which 0 caused framework failures 12496 were skipped 2274 expected passes 80 expected failures

RFC: migrating to git

2011-01-10 Thread Simon Marlow
It's time to consider again whether we should migrate GHC development from darcs to (probably) git. From our perspective at GHC HQ, the biggest problem that we would hope to solve by switching is that darcs makes branching and merging very difficult for us. We have a few branches of HEAD that

RE: patch applied (testsuite): Track changes in fuzzy-matching in error messages

2011-01-10 Thread Simon Peyton-Jones
Right. I've pushed a patch that doesn't make suggestions for single-character names. Simon | -Original Message- | From: omega.th...@gmail.com [mailto:omega.th...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Max | Bolingbroke | Sent: 24 December 2010 14:27 | To: Simon Peyton-Jones | Cc: Simon Marlow; cvs-ghc@

patch applied (testsuite): Follow change in out-of-scope variable suggestions

2011-01-10 Thread Simon Peyton Jones
Mon Jan 10 03:06:11 PST 2011 simo...@microsoft.com * Follow change in out-of-scope variable suggestions Now we don't suggest alternatives for single-character variables M ./tests/ghc-regress/arrows/should_fail/arrowfail002.stderr -3 +1 M ./tests/ghc-regress/driver/1372/1372.stderr

patch applied (testsuite): Follow wibbles in conflicting-instance error messages

2011-01-10 Thread Simon Peyton Jones
Mon Jan 10 03:07:17 PST 2011 simo...@microsoft.com * Follow wibbles in conflicting-instance error messages M ./tests/ghc-regress/indexed-types/should_fail/SimpleFail11a.stderr -4 +4 M ./tests/ghc-regress/indexed-types/should_fail/SimpleFail11b.stderr -4 +4 M ./tests/ghc-regress/inde

patch applied (testsuite): Follow improvement in kind-error message

2011-01-10 Thread Simon Peyton Jones
Mon Jan 10 03:06:47 PST 2011 simo...@microsoft.com * Follow improvement in kind-error message M ./tests/ghc-regress/typecheck/should_fail/tcfail136.stderr -1 +1 M ./tests/ghc-regress/typecheck/should_fail/tcfail151.stderr -1 +1 View patch online: http://darcs.haskell.org/cgi-bin/darcsw

patch applied (testsuite): Test Trac #4870

2011-01-10 Thread Simon Peyton Jones
Tue Jan 4 16:25:12 PST 2011 simo...@microsoft.com * Test Trac #4870 A ./tests/ghc-regress/deSugar/should_compile/T4870.hs A ./tests/ghc-regress/deSugar/should_compile/T4870a.hs M ./tests/ghc-regress/deSugar/should_compile/all.T +6 View patch online: http://darcs.haskell.org/cgi-bi

patch applied (testsuite): Test Trac #4875

2011-01-10 Thread Simon Peyton Jones
Tue Jan 4 16:15:10 PST 2011 simo...@microsoft.com * Test Trac #4875 A ./tests/ghc-regress/typecheck/should_fail/T4875.hs A ./tests/ghc-regress/typecheck/should_fail/T4875.stderr M ./tests/ghc-regress/typecheck/should_fail/all.T +1 View patch online: http://darcs.haskell.org/cgi-bi

patch applied (ghc): Do dependency analysis when kind-checking type declarations

2011-01-10 Thread Simon Peyton Jones
Mon Jan 10 03:03:51 PST 2011 simo...@microsoft.com * Do dependency analysis when kind-checking type declarations This patch fixes Trac #4875. The main point is to do dependency analysis on type and class declarations, and kind-check them in dependency order, so as to improve error mess

patch applied (ghc): Move imports around (no change in behaviour)

2011-01-10 Thread Simon Peyton Jones
Mon Jan 10 02:56:47 PST 2011 simo...@microsoft.com * Move imports around (no change in behaviour) M ./compiler/main/GHC.hs -4 +4 View patch online: http://darcs.haskell.org/cgi-bin/darcsweb.cgi?r=ghc;a=darcs_commitdiff;h=20110110105647-1287e-5ee2ba9bec13cf1b57549d5c9fcac6c5644d0713.gz ___

patch applied (ghc): Make fuzzy matching a little less eager for short identifiers

2011-01-10 Thread Simon Peyton Jones
Fri Jan 7 02:28:55 PST 2011 simo...@microsoft.com * Make fuzzy matching a little less eager for short identifiers For single-character identifiers we now don't make any suggestions See comments in Util.fuzzyLookup M ./compiler/utils/Util.lhs -3 +12 View patch online: http://darcs.h

patch applied (ghc): Fix Trac #4870: get the inlining for an imported INLINABLE Id

2011-01-10 Thread Simon Peyton Jones
Tue Jan 4 16:27:12 PST 2011 simo...@microsoft.com * Fix Trac #4870: get the inlining for an imported INLINABLE Id We need the unfolding even for a *recursive* function (indeed that's the point) and I was using the wrong function to get it (idUnfolding rather than realIdUnfolding).