RE: ghc-pkg/Cabal list syntax

"Simon Marlow" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.lang.haskell.cvs.fptools
Message-ID <3429668D0E777A499EE74A7952C382D1032E6654@EUR-MSG-01.europe.corp.microsoft.com>
On 18 February 2005 08:44, Sven Panne wrote:

> The syntax of different tools is a bit inconsistent: In the
> BLAH.buildinfo files, the values of e.g. ld-options are
> space-separated (but not most other list-valued entries in
> BLAH.cabal). "ghc-pkg describe" lists these as exta-ld-opts (why a
> different name here?), and these are *comma*-separated. I think this
> should be cleaned up a little bit. 
>
> And while we are at syntax: Regardless of the list separator, we
> should be able to include it into the values of the list elements,
> e.g. via "" or '' like shells. 
> The "space" behaviour ;-) of the Cabal syntax is a bit unclear to me
> in general 
> and seems to be rather ad-hoc...

Fair points.  Actually I don't like the comma syntax of the list fields
at all: the commas are superfluous, and it just makes it harder to
splice things in using preprocessing.  It might be too late to change
this though - thoughts anyone?

In any case, I propose we:

 - change extra-ld-opts and extra-cc-opts in InstalledPackageInfo
   to be ld-options and cc-options for consistency with BuildInfo

 - use listField rather than simpleField to parse ld-options and
   cc-options.  Also, options should be allowed to be quoted, so
   we need to introduce parseOptionQ.  InstalledPackageInfo uses
   parseFilePathQ for these fields which is wrong.

Cheers,
	Simon
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.