xcode 5 psa info on haskell platform page

[Carter Schonwald]

for 1) I thought the changes were to *DETECT* if the C compiler is actually
clang or gcc (at GHC invocation time), and then pass the appropriate flags
as needed, so that it will work correctly even if I (daftly) rotate between
gcc and clang.

 Once corner case I think we want to cover, is not just "only using xcode 4
or xcode 5" but also "updating from xcode 4 to xcode 5". The Clang wrapper
isn't quite robust/ for that, and doing  that outside of GHC is extra work,
because GHC 7.8 Should be able to handle that. so i'm against that.

Mark,  theres also OS X 10.9 SPECIFIC issues that have to be changed,
because the signals etc that OS X 10.9 provides are different in 1-2 cases,
eg I think Austin just committed a patch a day or so ago that deals with
getting the "page size" info correctly for 10.9, which is kinda crucial for
the runtime system!  Basically theres issues with just doing the wrapper
hack, and theres corner cases it just flatout doesn't address.

that said, I could be completely wrong, but thats my .00002 cents








On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 3:18 PM, Mark Lentczner <mark.lentczner at gmail.com>wrote:

> I've reviewed all the changes in that branch - and they seem to fall into
> two categories:
>
> 1) Changes the flags that ghc passes to whatever it thinks is gcc, so that
> they work with clang.
> 2) Changes to ghc source so that clang can compile it.
>
> For the platform, we don't care about #2 - we don't ship the GHC source,
> and we don't expect platform users to build it.
>
> Items in #1 look to my eye like they are covered by the wrapper script (or
> some equivalent that we can build with it). What's more, the changes in #1
> seem to rely on the idea that GHC was built knowing whether it will be used
> with gcc or with clang. This seems undesirable to me (at least for now),
> insofar as there will be people running Xcode 4 for the foreseeable future,
> and I'd really rather not have to produce variants of GHC or HP just to
> support Xcode 4 vs. 5.
>
> I don't see anything in those changes that handles the fact that gcc is
> hard coded into hsc2hs, though I might be misunderstanding that issue.
>
> So - looks to me like a bash script wrapper, and redirecting ghc's
> settings is still the best option.
>
> Am I missing anything?
>
> - Mark
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://projects.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-platform/attachments/20131027/5a979d44/attachment.htm>