Plan for GHC 8.6.1

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
11 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Plan for GHC 8.6.1

Ben Gamari-3
Hello fellow lazy purists,

With GHC 8.4.2 out the door, it is time to begin looking forward to
8.6.1. In keeping with our six-month release schedule, this release will
be targetted for early-September, with the stable branch being cut in
mid-to-late June.

Remarkably, this is only 6 weeks away. If you have patches that you
would like to see in 8.6.1, please do put them up on Phabricator and the
8.6.1 status page [1] in the coming weeks to ensure that there is
sufficient time for review.

If you have a patch which you are concerned won't make the cut-off, do
say something.

Cheers,

- Ben


[1] https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/Status/GHC-8.6.1

_______________________________________________
ghc-devs mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs

signature.asc (497 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Plan for GHC 8.6.1

Ryan Scott
I have one major feature planned: -XDerivingVia. I haven't made a
patch yet, since the idea itself is still technically going through
the proposal process at [1]. But the feedback seems pretty positive,
so I think I'll submit it to the committee next week for final
consideration.

There is an implementation that's 99% already at [2], so there
shouldn't be much of a delay in getting it to Phabricator once the
committee gives the go-ahead.

Ryan S.
-----
[1] https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/120
[2] https://github.com/RyanGlScott/ghc/tree/deriving-via-8.5
_______________________________________________
ghc-devs mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Plan for GHC 8.6.1

Ben Gamari-2
Ryan Scott <[hidden email]> writes:

> I have one major feature planned: -XDerivingVia. I haven't made a
> patch yet, since the idea itself is still technically going through
> the proposal process at [1]. But the feedback seems pretty positive,
> so I think I'll submit it to the committee next week for final
> consideration.
>
> There is an implementation that's 99% already at [2], so there
> shouldn't be much of a delay in getting it to Phabricator once the
> committee gives the go-ahead.
>
Right, I think this can be made to work assuming there is no objection
from the devops committee.

Thanks for the heads-up!

Cheers,

- Ben


_______________________________________________
ghc-devs mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs

signature.asc (497 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Plan for GHC 8.6.1

Matthew Pickering
In reply to this post by Ben Gamari-3
Perhaps Nested CPR will be ready :) ? https://phabricator.haskell.org/D4244

I am also working on the linear types branch. Arnaud is quite keen for
it to be ready for 8.6 but we still have a bit to go.

Cheers,

Matt

On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 1:26 AM, Ben Gamari <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hello fellow lazy purists,
>
> With GHC 8.4.2 out the door, it is time to begin looking forward to
> 8.6.1. In keeping with our six-month release schedule, this release will
> be targetted for early-September, with the stable branch being cut in
> mid-to-late June.
>
> Remarkably, this is only 6 weeks away. If you have patches that you
> would like to see in 8.6.1, please do put them up on Phabricator and the
> 8.6.1 status page [1] in the coming weeks to ensure that there is
> sufficient time for review.
>
> If you have a patch which you are concerned won't make the cut-off, do
> say something.
>
> Cheers,
>
> - Ben
>
>
> [1] https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/Status/GHC-8.6.1
>
> _______________________________________________
> ghc-devs mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
>
_______________________________________________
ghc-devs mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Plan for GHC 8.6.1

Ben Gamari-3
Matthew Pickering <[hidden email]> writes:

> Perhaps Nested CPR will be ready :) ? https://phabricator.haskell.org/D4244
>
> I am also working on the linear types branch. Arnaud is quite keen for
> it to be ready for 8.6 but we still have a bit to go.
>
I'll admit that I'm a bit worried that the linear types branch may be a
bit late given that the proposal only went to the committee last week.
That being said, I'm happy to keep all options on the table.

Regardless, it might be a good idea to put up a patch sooner rather than
later so we can begin the review process.

Cheers,

- Ben

_______________________________________________
ghc-devs mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs

signature.asc (497 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Plan for GHC 8.6.1

Carter Schonwald
Even aside from committee feedback easily being weeks away for such a complex proposal, I’m also concerned about how the current proposed design changes to core seem a bit fragile with linear types.  Perhaps I’m misunderstanding some of the current planned details , but I’m fairly confident that I’ve got a median or better comprehension. 

Type checking as if the code were inlined (per join points and related case expressions as the linear core doc says ) tends to be a symptom of the types not quite modelling the right information.  Likewise would not that sort of checking create a possible quadratic blowup when linting/ type checking core? (And quadratic blowups are bad when debugging/checking  possibly large core programs in the core of any ghc debugging or the like !) 

That said, putting a check point on phab for feedback of a technical sort is def something that would help.  The ghc proposal spec is vaguer than I’d like for something like this.  And a lot of important details I care about will be visible in the code that are lacking in the associated proposal and paper. 

On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 11:02 AM Ben Gamari <[hidden email]> wrote:
Matthew Pickering <[hidden email]> writes:

> Perhaps Nested CPR will be ready :) ? https://phabricator.haskell.org/D4244
>
> I am also working on the linear types branch. Arnaud is quite keen for
> it to be ready for 8.6 but we still have a bit to go.
>
I'll admit that I'm a bit worried that the linear types branch may be a
bit late given that the proposal only went to the committee last week.
That being said, I'm happy to keep all options on the table.

Regardless, it might be a good idea to put up a patch sooner rather than
later so we can begin the review process.

Cheers,

- Ben
_______________________________________________
ghc-devs mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs

_______________________________________________
ghc-devs mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Plan for GHC 8.6.1

George Colpitts
In reply to this post by Ben Gamari-3
Hello

Will ghc 8.6.1 use llvm 6.0? The page below doesn't mention it. GHC 8.4.2 and 8.4.3 seem to work with llvm 6.0 but I haven't done extensive testing.

Thanks
George

On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 9:27 PM Ben Gamari <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hello fellow lazy purists,

With GHC 8.4.2 out the door, it is time to begin looking forward to
8.6.1. In keeping with our six-month release schedule, this release will
be targetted for early-September, with the stable branch being cut in
mid-to-late June.

Remarkably, this is only 6 weeks away. If you have patches that you
would like to see in 8.6.1, please do put them up on Phabricator and the
8.6.1 status page [1] in the coming weeks to ensure that there is
sufficient time for review.

If you have a patch which you are concerned won't make the cut-off, do
say something.

Cheers,

- Ben


[1] https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/Status/GHC-8.6.1
_______________________________________________
ghc-devs mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs

_______________________________________________
ghc-devs mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Plan for GHC 8.6.1

Ben Gamari-3
Moritz Angermann <[hidden email]> writes:

> Hi,
>
> I would almost go as far as saying 8.6 will work with LLVM4-6. GHC llvm codegen
> is really only dependent on the textual IR, and even there only on the parts we
> use.  This used to be an issue, where LLVMs textual IR changed quite a bit, but
> it looks like it hasn't for the last few releases.
>
> This of course does not insulate us from bugs in LLVM itself, which might or
> might not affect us.
>
> Maybe we can be a bit more lenient with respect to LLVM versions?
>
I would really prefer not to be. We put in place the current policy for
a few good reasons: not only was keeping up with the syntactic changes
in a compatible way tiresome, but various sets of LLVM bugs meant
significantly more work during ticket triage.

While the relative syntactic stability of the last few LLVM releases may
reduce the relevance of the first reason, the second reason holds just
as well today as it did two years ago.

Cheers,

- Ben


_______________________________________________
ghc-devs mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs

signature.asc (497 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Plan for GHC 8.6.1

George Colpitts

I agree. 

So back to my original question: will ghc 8.6.1 be moving to llvm 6 from llvm 5?

Thanks
George


On Sun, Jun 24, 2018 at 12:11 PM Ben Gamari <[hidden email]> wrote:
Moritz Angermann <[hidden email]> writes:

> Hi,
>
> I would almost go as far as saying 8.6 will work with LLVM4-6. GHC llvm codegen
> is really only dependent on the textual IR, and even there only on the parts we
> use.  This used to be an issue, where LLVMs textual IR changed quite a bit, but
> it looks like it hasn't for the last few releases.
>
> This of course does not insulate us from bugs in LLVM itself, which might or
> might not affect us.
>
> Maybe we can be a bit more lenient with respect to LLVM versions?
>
I would really prefer not to be. We put in place the current policy for
a few good reasons: not only was keeping up with the syntactic changes
in a compatible way tiresome, but various sets of LLVM bugs meant
significantly more work during ticket triage.

While the relative syntactic stability of the last few LLVM releases may
reduce the relevance of the first reason, the second reason holds just
as well today as it did two years ago.

Cheers,

- Ben


_______________________________________________
ghc-devs mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Plan for GHC 8.6.1

Ben Gamari-3
George Colpitts <[hidden email]> writes:

> I agree.
>
> So back to my original question: will ghc 8.6.1 be moving to llvm 6 from
> llvm 5?
>
Ahh, whoops, missed the original question!

8.6 will use LLVM 6.0.

Cheers,

- Ben

_______________________________________________
ghc-devs mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs

signature.asc (497 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Plan for GHC 8.6.1

Carter Schonwald
current cabal has a nasty build failure on haddock errors, i'd really appeciate some eyeballs / attention / ideas on how to get my fix / PR for it over the finish line for GHC 8.6 

(the issue is that haddock failures, such as on an empty package, fail an entire build)

On Sun, Jun 24, 2018 at 12:56 PM Ben Gamari <[hidden email]> wrote:
George Colpitts <[hidden email]> writes:

> I agree.
>
> So back to my original question: will ghc 8.6.1 be moving to llvm 6 from
> llvm 5?
>
Ahh, whoops, missed the original question!

8.6 will use LLVM 6.0.

Cheers,

- Ben
_______________________________________________
ghc-devs mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs

_______________________________________________
ghc-devs mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs