Ian Lynagh:
> On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 09:32:05PM +1100, Manuel M T Chakravarty wrote:
>> Simon Peyton-Jones:
>>> | If DPH is installed, -fdph-par is now the default. Unfortunately,
>>> during the build
>>> | process, the package DB is populated with packages at a time where they
>>> are not ye
Simon Marlow:
> On 20/01/2011 10:00, Manuel M T Chakravarty wrote:
>> Simon Marlow:
>>> On 20/01/2011 08:18, Roman Leshchinskiy wrote:
On 20/01/2011, at 06:42, Manuel M T Chakravarty wrote:
> After some changes to GHC's handling of DPH packages, I'm
> currently fighting with the
Simon Marlow:
> On 20/01/2011 11:57, Manuel M T Chakravarty wrote:
>> Roman Leshchinskiy:
>>> Manuel M T Chakravarty wrote:
Roman Leshchinskiy:
> Manuel M T Chakravarty wrote:
>
>>
>> I would like that, too. (In fact, it is what I implemented at
>> first.) Unfortun
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 05:42:28PM +1100, Manuel M T Chakravarty wrote:
> After some changes to GHC's handling of DPH packages, I'm currently fighting
> with the build system. In particular, I'm getting
>
> > "inplace/bin/ghc-cabal" configure
> > --with-ghc="/Users/chak/Code/ghc-test/inplace/bi
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 09:32:05PM +1100, Manuel M T Chakravarty wrote:
> Simon Peyton-Jones:
> > | If DPH is installed, -fdph-par is now the default. Unfortunately,
> > during the build
> > | process, the package DB is populated with packages at a time where they
> > are not yet
> > | availa
On 20/01/2011 10:00, Manuel M T Chakravarty wrote:
Simon Marlow:
On 20/01/2011 08:18, Roman Leshchinskiy wrote:
On 20/01/2011, at 06:42, Manuel M T Chakravarty wrote:
After some changes to GHC's handling of DPH packages, I'm
currently fighting with the build system. In particular, I'm
gettin
On 20/01/2011 11:57, Manuel M T Chakravarty wrote:
Roman Leshchinskiy:
Manuel M T Chakravarty wrote:
Roman Leshchinskiy:
Manuel M T Chakravarty wrote:
I would like that, too. (In fact, it is what I implemented at
first.) Unfortunately, it doesn't work. Language options are dynamic
option
Manuel M T Chakravarty wrote:
> Roman Leshchinskiy:
>
>> Alternatively, should we make -fdph-* static?
>>
>
> How would that help our problem?
It wouldn't. But at least we wouldn't have flags that are silently ignored.
Roman
___
Cvs-ghc mailing list
Roman Leshchinskiy:
> Manuel M T Chakravarty wrote:
>> Roman Leshchinskiy:
>>
>>> Manuel M T Chakravarty wrote:
>>>
I would like that, too. (In fact, it is what I implemented at
first.) Unfortunately, it doesn't work. Language options are dynamic
options, but -package is a
Manuel M T Chakravarty wrote:
> Roman Leshchinskiy:
>
>> Manuel M T Chakravarty wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I would like that, too. (In fact, it is what I implemented at
>>> first.) Unfortunately, it doesn't work. Language options are dynamic
>>> options, but -package is a weird intermediate between static
Roman Leshchinskiy:
> Manuel M T Chakravarty wrote:
>> Roman Leshchinskiy:
>>
>>> Do you mean that GHC now assumes -fdph-par even if DPH isn't used? That
>>> doesn't seem right to me. I know we said that it should be the default
>>> but I assumed the defaulting would only happen for modules with -
Manuel M T Chakravarty wrote:
> Roman Leshchinskiy:
>
>> Do you mean that GHC now assumes -fdph-par even if DPH isn't used? That
>> doesn't seem right to me. I know we said that it should be the default
>> but I assumed the defaulting would only happen for modules with -XPArr
>> (or
>> whatever th
Simon Peyton-Jones:
> | If DPH is installed, -fdph-par is now the default. Unfortunately, during
> the build
> | process, the package DB is populated with packages at a time where they
> are not yet
> | available.
>
> I believe that used to be the case, but Ian changed it recently. So it ma
Roman Leshchinskiy:
> Manuel M T Chakravarty wrote:
>>
>> The --dph-this shouldn't be there in the configure options, but it needs
>> to be passed to this invocation to GHC (that it isn't passed is actually
>> the reason for the error). Why? If DPH is installed, -fdph-par is now
>> the default.
| If DPH is installed, -fdph-par is now the default. Unfortunately, during
the build
| process, the package DB is populated with packages at a time where they are
not yet
| available.
I believe that used to be the case, but Ian changed it recently. So it may no
longer be the case. Death to
Manuel M T Chakravarty wrote:
>
> The --dph-this shouldn't be there in the configure options, but it needs
> to be passed to this invocation to GHC (that it isn't passed is actually
> the reason for the error). Why? If DPH is installed, -fdph-par is now
> the default. Unfortunately, during the b
Simon Marlow:
> On 20/01/2011 08:18, Roman Leshchinskiy wrote:
>> On 20/01/2011, at 06:42, Manuel M T Chakravarty wrote:
>>
>>> After some changes to GHC's handling of DPH packages, I'm currently
>>> fighting with the build system. In particular, I'm getting
>>>
"inplace/bin/ghc-cabal" conf
Simon Marlow wrote:
> On 20/01/2011 08:18, Roman Leshchinskiy wrote:
>
>> and it should be using the stage2 compiler since stage1 can't compile
>> DPH anyway.
>>
>
> Not in this case - it's configuring the ghc-prim package, which is
> compiled with stage1.
Oops. I misread ghc-prim as dph-prim. I s
On 20/01/2011 08:18, Roman Leshchinskiy wrote:
On 20/01/2011, at 06:42, Manuel M T Chakravarty wrote:
After some changes to GHC's handling of DPH packages, I'm currently
fighting with the build system. In particular, I'm getting
"inplace/bin/ghc-cabal" configure
--with-ghc="/Users/chak/Code/
On 20/01/2011, at 06:42, Manuel M T Chakravarty wrote:
> After some changes to GHC's handling of DPH packages, I'm currently fighting
> with the build system. In particular, I'm getting
>
>> "inplace/bin/ghc-cabal" configure
>> --with-ghc="/Users/chak/Code/ghc-test/inplace/bin/ghc-stage1"
>>
After some changes to GHC's handling of DPH packages, I'm currently fighting
with the build system. In particular, I'm getting
> "inplace/bin/ghc-cabal" configure
> --with-ghc="/Users/chak/Code/ghc-test/inplace/bin/ghc-stage1"
> --with-ghc-pkg="/Users/chak/Code/ghc-test/inplace/bin/ghc-pkg"
>
21 matches
Mail list logo
