Accept arbitrary entry points for executables

[sol]

No description provided.

[jkarni]

Isn't this more properly a isVariableIdentifier? Constructor identifiers can have uppercase

[sol]

Good point. I'll also reject reserved keywords.

[sol]

Hmm, but the it would become isQualifiedVariableIdentifier. I think I will ignore the ambiguity in naming for now until we actual have a name clash.

[soenkehahn]

Maybe add a test for ["Foo", "bar", "Baz"]?

[soenkehahn]

This seems neat, but I wonder: what's the primary motivation for supporting something like Run.run?

I also wonder which ghc versions support this.

[jkarni]

Some relevant discussion here.

This seems neat, but I wonder: what's the primary motivation for supporting something like Run.run?

I kind of like the idea of being allowed to have two or more different executables from only one source file.

[soenkehahn]

This would also remove the necessity for having dummy Main.hs files, right?

[soenkehahn]

LGTM.

[soenkehahn]

Yeah, I want this. :)

[sol]

Yes, me too. But there is still a concern, according to the GHC manual -main-is is a compile time option. As I understand it, objects files compiled with -main-is can not be reused for other purposes and object files compiled without it can not be used as main entry point (but I still have to try). This is ok if you already have a double compilation setup, but e.g having a library section and then depend on that in an executable section and specify one module from the library as main probably won't work :(

Sent from my iPhone

On 19 May 2015, at 6:29 pm, Sönke Hahn notifications@github.com wrote:

Yeah, I want this. :)

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

[soenkehahn]

You mean it will just break? As in cabal will through link errors?

[sol]

@soenkehahn cabal will complain about a missing source file. Haven't tried plain ghc.

[sol]

I still think it's possible to get this working by generating a Main.hs instead of relying on GHCs -main-is.

But I'm not sure if I want to do this right now. This would be a super useful feature, but we would diverge from "simple generating cabal files" at that point.