-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 27
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Clean up the repository #6
Comments
I support this cleanup. The documentation deserves its own repo. The current documentation is far from enough to support a wider adoption of hoopl. I had some thoughts about improving the documentation and will share them later. |
mkfile was removed. It's no longer needed. All tests can be run with "cabal test" |
Most of the prototypes don't compile and keeping them in the repository might be more confusing than helpful.
It contained reviews from ICFP and POPL, which are not really useful (at least now) and probably shouldn't have been made public in the first place.
I've made some more cleanup, but I've got error while trying to push changes to branch:
What am I doing wrong? Should I maybe use Phabricator instead? |
You don't have the write permission to this repo. You need to create a On 12/25/2015 7:59 AM, Alexander Pankiv wrote:
|
Sorry, worked with private repositories only before that. |
Part of ticket cleaning up the repository (ticket haskell#6). For discussions about the paper see also PR haskell#22.
Part of ticket cleaning up the repository (ticket haskell#6). For discussions about the paper see also PR haskell#22.
Repository currently stores things that should not be there:
src
directory stores some unused modules likeCompiler.Hoopl.OldDataflow
(perhaps some other as well?).There are other files that might be good candidates for removal but need some more thinking before making such a decision:
mkfile
s - do we actually use them? If so, do they do anything that cannot be done using Cabal?The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: