-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 378
New issue
Have a question about this project? # for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “#”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? # to your account
Build with GHC 9.2 #2503
Build with GHC 9.2 #2503
Conversation
It looks like the Compat layer no longer builds with GHC 9.2:
There are more errors when I fix this one:
/cc @fendor |
It is easily possible that some imports are incomplete, that was left on the todo list. Not all, but at least most of these imports were added when GHC 9.0 support was added to the plugins. Which was at the very end of my "sprint". However, adding (or hiding appropriately) the imports should suffice for most of these errors. Additionally, iirc, the There is at least one big issue left: https://github.com/haskell/haskell-language-server/blob/master/ghcide/src/Development/IDE/GHC/Compat/Outputable.hs#L156 |
If you (or anyone else) is up for helping with this PR, the branch is open to all contributors |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
…n terms of in-tree annotations)
My last commit stubs out the |
I'm not a big fan either, but we still use it in a couple of places. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
The Exactprint module compiles, but code actions are the next focus.
Issues that are left in the thread do not mandate the blockage of the GHC 9.2 support. Let us go forward. Since I took part in Ops situations left. When the code merges into the mainline - I would take this thread & open the reports on them. File after the merge: Already opened: Also went through the thread & folded some resolved things. So the thread now is more reviewable. |
The proverbial green light is about to shine. Shall we land this in time for a January HLS Release? |
yeah, I would include it, maybe with a note about being still experimental?i is it being used on ghc itself by some ghc dev, @wz1000 @mpickering? |
I was using an older version of this branch whilst working on a particular GHC branch but not since the testsuite passed. That version had some bugs to do with imports but Zubin said they were due to ghc-exactprint problems which I believe are now fixed. |
If we do (which would be great!), it would be nice to make sure #2579 gets merged. |
@@ -146,7 +146,7 @@ jobs: | |||
|
|||
run: cabal test wrapper-test --test-options="$TEST_OPTS --rerun-log-file .tasty-rerun-log-wrapper" || cabal test wrapper-test --test-options="$TEST_OPTS --rerun-log-file .tasty-rerun-log-wrapper" || cabal test wrapper-test --test-options="$TEST_OPTS --rerun-log-file .tasty-rerun-log-wrapper" | |||
|
|||
- if: matrix.test && matrix.ghc != '9.0.1' && matrix.ghc != '9.2.1' | |||
- if: matrix.test && matrix.ghc != '9.2.1' |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
FYI @jneira I conservatively merged to allow 9.0.1 since we fixed it on master but not allow 9.2.1, but maybe fixing it for 9.0.1 also fixed it for 9.2.1. Not sure, we should try after this is merged perhaps.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
If nobody objects, I'll merge this shortly.
Build a GHC 9.2 binary via head.hackage:
Branch is open to contributions - let's crowdsource this.