clean up haddock for hidden modules

[bos]

(Imported from Trac #21, reported by anonymous on 2005-11-13)

A patch is attached, but it's out of date, I think. It needs to also work on executables. Also, we need to check that it works on lhs files, and add a test case.

[bos]

(Imported comment by @SyntaxPolice on 2005-11-13)

partial patch

[bos]

(Imported comment by anonymous on 2005-11-13)

In fact, this patch handles all of the above cases. Applying and closing this bug :) Thanks, Einar.

[bos]

(Imported comment by @SyntaxPolice on 2005-11-13)

Ross says:

Haddock complains if a module has two module attribute lines, which
it will have if the author has already put one there (or if you run
setup haddock twice?). You could check for a module attribute line,
but I think it's simpler just to require authors to put the #hide in.
Redundant and a little tedious, but modifying source files is clunky.

[bos]

(Imported comment by anonymous on 2005-11-14)

On 14.11 10:29, Krasimir Angelov wrote:

Some time ago I added support for haddock-izing hidden modules. Cabal just have to supply --hide <module> command line option to Haddock. What is wrong with this and why we need to add #hide pragmas?

The patch in question was created on 14th july, while Haddock
0.7 which added --hide was released in august. That explains
why there was no --hide. Using it --hide is better now that
Haddock supports it.

Many apologies. I ran across this patch the other day; it might be useful for old versions of haddock; I forgot that a new version had been released w/ the --hide flag. In either case, we should be checking the version of haddock.

[bos]

(Imported comment by ross on 2005-11-14)

fixed by patch "cvs pulls from krasimir and ross" 31 Oct 2005.