Packages and modules
simonmarhaskell at gmail.com
Fri Jul 7 03:50:53 EDT 2006
Malcolm Wallace wrote:
> But the biggest problem is really your phrase "(but only in one place)".
> I agree that specifying the dependencies close together is good in
> principle. But occasionally, you need to have different package
> dependencies for different modules of a single project - this is a finer
> granularity of dependency than Cabal is currently good at expressing.
By all means have package names scattered through the source code, but
the dependencies still need to be specified in a single place for each
project. The main reason is so that tools can grab the dependencies of
a package without too much fuss: tools that turn Haskell packages into
OS packages, for example.
More information about the Libraries