Skip to content

Single consolidated executable#2633

Merged
paf31 merged 10 commits intophil/2604from
phil/2336
Feb 7, 2017
Merged

Single consolidated executable#2633
paf31 merged 10 commits intophil/2604from
phil/2336

Conversation

@paf31
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@paf31 paf31 commented Feb 7, 2017

Fixes #2336. This also removes psc-ide-client, which had been discussed previously.

@kritzcreek
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Looking good! I've pr'd #2634 against this branch to fix the test failures. We said we wanted to provide wrappers around the consolidated executable to smoothen the breakage or do we just go full burning bridges with 0.11?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@hdgarrood hdgarrood left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Unfortunately github's mobile UI isn't good enough for me to be able to give this a proper review so I've only glanced over it so far. It does look good though.

, optionsSourceMaps :: Bool
-- |
-- Dump CoreFn
-- ^ Generate soure maps
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Typo?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes, thanks.

@hdgarrood
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Perhaps we could provide shell scripts named after the old executables for backwards compatibility in the binary bundles, just for the 0.11 series? They'd only need to be a few lines I think.

For true backwards compat we would also need to have psc work like the new psc build, I guess that could be triggered if the first argument doesn't match any of the sub-commands.

infoModList :: Opts.InfoMod a
infoModList = Opts.fullDesc <> footerInfo where
footerInfo = Opts.footerDoc $ Just $ PP.vcat
[ examples, PP.empty, PP.text ("psc-docs " ++ showVersion Paths.version) ]
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Oh wait, should we remove this reference to psc-docs?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes, looks like it.

version :: Parser (a -> a)
version = abortOption (InfoMsg (showVersion Paths.version)) $ long "version" <> help "Show the version number" <> hidden
command :: Opts.Parser (IO ())
command = compile <$> (version <*> Opts.helper <*> pscMakeOptions) where
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm not sure the sub commands need to be able to respond to --version. Having psc --version work is enough IMO, we don't also need to support psc build --version etc.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

True :)

* fix test failure and cabal warning

* add missing files to cabal file
@paf31
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

paf31 commented Feb 7, 2017

I'll fix the remaining bits on the other branch, after merging this. I also need to update the bundle script.

@paf31 paf31 merged commit 196d86f into phil/2604 Feb 7, 2017
@paf31 paf31 deleted the phil/2336 branch February 7, 2017 16:51
paf31 added a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 8, 2017
* Remove psc-package

* Single consolidated executable (#2633)

* Single consolidated executable #2336

* PSCi

* bundle

* docs

* hierarchy

* publish

* ide

* Remove some old options, fix #2618

* Fix warning

* fix test failure and cabal warning (#2634)

* fix test failure and cabal warning

* add missing files to cabal file

* Various

* Fix tests again
@kritzcreek
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

I just checked and it seems like psc-ide-vim still relies on psc-ide-client. Maybe it would be best to keep it around behind purs ide --client.

@paf31
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

paf31 commented Feb 16, 2017

@kritzcreek Sounds good, we can add it back.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants