On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 12:32:36PM -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
> so random Python code is fairly likely to work with it :)
You are thinking about Perl. Random Python code is likely to fail to
compile.
;-)
-m.
On Mon, 2003-06-23 at 04:38, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 22, 2003 at 09:07:05PM -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
>
> > Right, but that approach definitely has some disadvantages, namely
> > fragility and the fact that we're kind of subverting the whole idea of
> > binary packages.
>
>
"Marcelo E. Magallon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It kind of depends on what "Haskell library" means. Is it more like a
> C library (potentially complex build system, dependencies, etc) or is
> it more like a Perl module?
As David Roundy sorta indicated, it could be either one. Building
Ha
On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 10:38:40AM +0200, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 22, 2003 at 09:07:05PM -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
>
> > Right, but that approach definitely has some disadvantages, namely
> > fragility and the fact that we're kind of subverting the whole idea of
> > binary packa
On Sun, Jun 22, 2003 at 09:07:05PM -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
> Right, but that approach definitely has some disadvantages, namely
> fragility and the fact that we're kind of subverting the whole idea of
> binary packages.
It kind of depends on what "Haskell library" means. Is it more like
On Sun, 2003-06-22 at 18:08, Alan Shutko wrote:
> Isaac Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > How would Debian prefer to see this? Some people tell me that it'll
> > probably be too slow to build the packages on the end-user's system
> > (as is done for elisp),
>
> That's also done with Commo
Isaac Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> How would Debian prefer to see this? Some people tell me that it'll
> probably be too slow to build the packages on the end-user's system
> (as is done for elisp),
That's also done with Common Lisp, and I don't think it's too slow
(as an end-user).
--
On Sunday 22 June 2003 19:45, Isaac Jones wrote:
> There has been a lot of discussion recently on the Haskell mailing
> lists about the best ways to package Haskell libraries and tools for
> Debian. The main issues are:
>
> 1) there are a variety of "compiler" implementations, one of which is
> an
Greetings,
There has been a lot of discussion recently on the Haskell mailing
lists about the best ways to package Haskell libraries and tools for
Debian. The main issues are:
1) there are a variety of "compiler" implementations, one of which is
an interpreter :)
2) not all Haskell implementati
9 matches
Mail list logo
