patch applied (ghc): Changing internal data structures used by
simonmarhaskell at gmail.com
Wed May 2 05:18:10 EDT 2007
Andy Gill wrote:
> No worries Simon!
> To test the -fhpc you use the hpc test suite - still in vaporware, but
> will be installed *before* 6.8 RC1.
> What I do is run a ~12 module program for coverage, and look at the
> output for sanity right now.
> Inside the Coverage.hs changes, the scoping was broken. The state was
> escaping, and local names
> were being marked as x.y.z.a.b.c.... - basically every name in *any*
Urk - I see now, withState and bindLocals were completely wrong. Thanks for
> Opps - but with no test
> suite I can not complain. I changed the monad to use an environment for
> the scope, forcing
> the scope to be accurate by design during recursive descent.
> Otherwise, we have coverage working fine right now. I needed to fix a
> problem with cases round
> errors, but this is a corner case, and ticks are preserved now.
> What is the state of the GHCi debugger? What can I do to help?
Try it out! (http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/NewGhciDebugger, and see
:help in GHCi). Getting it talking to your hpc-tracer visualiser would be
fantastic, and I hope shouldn't be too hard.
> Where would I put documentation
> for hpc in the GHC manual?
Give it a new section under section 4 (Using GHC) I would think.
> What is a good way to package up the hpc tools for GHC users? Cabal?
I'd be happy to ship them directly with GHC, unless that entails extra
dependencies or license problems. If you'd prefer to provide them separately
using Cabal/Hackage, then that's fine too.
> How do we handle Cabal built library packages vs Cabal built tools
> (like haddock)?
Not sure what you mean here...
> On May 1, 2007, at 1:28 AM, Simon Marlow wrote:
>> Andy Gill wrote:
>>> Mon Apr 30 15:59:15 PDT 2007 andy at galois.com
>>> * Changing internal data structures used by Hpc
>>> - .tix files are now a list of MixModule, which contain a hash
>>> of the contents of the .mix file.
>>> - .mix files now have (the same) hash number.
>>> This changes allow different binaries that use the same module
>>> compiled in the same way
>>> to share coverage information.
>> Hi Andy - I've made lots of changes to Coverage.lhs recently (as you
>> probably saw) in relation to the GHCi debugger. I've been meaning to
>> get around to checking that HPC still works properly. Have you
>> noticed any problems? Any recommendations on how best to test it?
More information about the Cvs-ghc