-pgmc/a/l default options, other ideas
p.tanski at gmail.com
Fri Jan 5 10:08:08 EST 2007
On Jan 5, 2007, at 4:53 AM, Simon Marlow wrote:
> Peter Tanski wrote:
>> On Jan 4, 2007, at 4:53 AM, Simon Marlow wrote:
>>> -ccflavour gcc
>>> -ccflavour cl
>> ... So, package.conf it is; cc-flavour/ cc-flavor (accept both
>> spellings) should be added to data BuildInfo in
> I'm probably being a bit stupid (no coffee yet this morning!), but
> I can't immediately see why a new field needs to be added to
> BuildInfo. Could you explain?
> I can imagine that we might need 'cl-options' in addition to 'cc-
> options', though.
If the purpose of -ccflavour is to encapsulate any number of
different C compilers, then it would be easier and more general to
add 'cc-flavour' to BuildInfo than to add, say:
cl-options MS CL
scc-options Sun 'CC' compiler (overlaps 'cc-options')
xlc-options IBM XL/C compiler
I don't see any immediate need add all these other compilers but that
is the design consideration. As an added bonus, cc-flavour in
BuildInfo would parallel the -ccflavour command line option.
>> The basic setup for Win-GHC shouldn't take too long to complete.
>> I was close to done before Christmas, although I still don't
>> know whether to scrap MkDLL or modify it to use link.exe and .def
>> files as Esa suggested. The story is in the source code, somewhere.
> Modifying it to use the MS tools seems like the right thing to do.
> This isn't on the critical path, though.
So far I have been putting it down as a 'dummy' option, returning an
error on usage. For now I should simply leave the MkDLL code
intact. (I think I have asked questions similar to this about three
times in the past year! Not again!)
More information about the Cvs-ghc