browsing on github

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

browsing on github

Richard Eisenberg-2
Hi fellow devs,

Do any of you use github for browsing the GHC code? I find it useful sometimes, especially when I'm collaborating with someone remotely and wish to send a link to some code, or when I don't have a particular branch to hand. As of October, github now renders all .lhs files as Markdown. It seems other Haskellers have requested this, but it wreaks havoc on GHC's code, which does not use Markdown. In particular, Markdown uses ~~~~ to delineate code segments, and GHC uses that to underline Notes. This has bothered me for months, but I finally rooted down the cause and opened a ticket. The ticket is here: https://github.com/github/markup/issues/196  If you have run into this problem and have an opinion about it, please share it there!

Thanks,
Richard
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-devs/attachments/20130424/15515393/attachment.htm>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

browsing on github

Jan Stolarek
Opening a ticket is a good idea - this problem has been iritating me as well and in fact I almost
gave up on browsing GHC code on github.

As a side note it seems to me that writing literate Haskell is not really popular and I would be
happy to see the source code of GHC converted to .hs one day (I wouldn't mind converting some of
it myself).

Janek


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

browsing on github

Kim-Ee Yeoh
Administrator
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 2:21 PM, Jan Stolarek <jan.stolarek at p.lodz.pl>wrote:

> As a side note it seems to me that writing literate Haskell is not really
> popular and I would be happy to see the source code of GHC converted to .hs
> one day (I wouldn't mind converting some of it myself).
>

Care to explain what this means?

Surely you're not asking everyone to change their coding convention to suit
your taste?

You don't need permission to fork and rewrite code as you see fit. Forking
on social coding sites is nice because you get a free open invitation to
everyone similarly inclined to join in and help you out.

-- Kim-Ee
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-devs/attachments/20130425/def1a9ca/attachment.htm>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

browsing on github

Jan Stolarek
> Surely you're not asking everyone to change their coding convention to suit
> your taste?
So, is literate Haskell everyone's coding convention? It seems to me that today people are more
likely to document their code with Haddock and the code written in literate Haskell is remnant of
a distant past. That's my impression at least. I'm not asking people to blindly do what I ask, no
need to get upset here. But I think a bit of discussion on this subject wouldn't hurt. Right know
GHC has some code written in literate Haskell and some code written in plain Haskell. Having a
uniform way of doing things would not be a bad thing. Especially that using both literate Haskell
and plain Haskell can use to problems such as this:
http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/7605

Janek


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

browsing on github

Kim-Ee Yeoh
Administrator
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 4:45 PM, Jan Stolarek <jan.stolarek at p.lodz.pl>wrote:

> http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/7605
>

Vestigial file problems can get nasty; kudos on the catch!

-- Kim-Ee
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-devs/attachments/20130425/5316616f/attachment.htm>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

browsing on github

Jason Dagit-3
In reply to this post by Jan Stolarek
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 12:21 AM, Jan Stolarek <jan.stolarek at p.lodz.pl> wrote:
> Opening a ticket is a good idea - this problem has been iritating me as well and in fact I almost
> gave up on browsing GHC code on github.

+1

I use "raw" view for .lhs files as a workaround.

>
> As a side note it seems to me that writing literate Haskell is not really popular and I would be
> happy to see the source code of GHC converted to .hs one day (I wouldn't mind converting some of
> it myself).

My experience has been that outside of papers, tutorials, and blog
posts that lhs is more trouble than it's worth. The downside is that
haddock is not a very good markup language. It's just fine for plain
text comments, but if you want to say something mathematical in a
haddock comment it may get the wrong idea (x /y + a/b, would render y
+ a in italics and not show the divisions). So I don't think we should
convert them unless there is a stronger reason than github rendering.

I think the right thing is to leave the .lhs files how they are for
now and try to convince github to stop treating .lhs as markdown.

Jason