[nightly] 10-Aug-2008 build of HEAD on
malcolm.wallace at cs.york.ac.uk
Mon Aug 11 13:53:07 EDT 2008
> 1. whatever I check in, the _whole_ thing has to build ok
> 2. if _my_ changes break someone else's code, _I_ have to fix that
> I'd suggest to interpret GHC+corelibs as a unit, and to apply rules
> 1 and 2.
To put it crudely, I don't see why the Hugs and nhc98 developers
should be forced to run a ghc validate, when the ghc developers never
run their changes through Hugs or nhc98 to check for breakage there.
Now there isn't really as big a divide as it sounds when I put it that
way. Fixing library breakage due to GHC changes is only a mild
irritation, and I know it is ultimately in a good cause. I'm not
complaining about the current situation at all.
But I do wish to point out that you cannot achieve both goals: "make
GHC and its dependencies into a single unit" and "share the libraries
with other compilers". At least, not without accepting some extra
work on the GHC side to maintain both illusions.
More information about the Cvs-ghc