| 15 Jul 2025 |
 maralorn | The major problem with ld-options is that they override preconfigured ld-options. | 15:23:30 |
| maralorn | Which is no problem for the js backend because it currently has none. | 15:23:46 |
| maralorn | But in general they are mainly meant for ghc devs for debugging purposes and bgamari dislikes the fact that they are exposed via cabal options. | 15:24:41 |
 nf | * has anyone seen this error before with the GHC JS backend?
Aborted('HEAP8' was not exported. add it to EXPORTED_RUNTIME_METHODS (see the Emscripten FAQ))
| 16:06:43 |
| 16 Jul 2025 |
| nf | Is this the blessed way to write an overlay that adds a package foo to all Haskell package sets, without undoing previous overlays? If so, should we add it to the manual?
final: prev: {
haskell = prev.haskell // {
packageOverrides = final.lib.composeExtensions prev.haskell.packageOverrides
(hfinal: hprev: {
foo = ...;
});
};
}
| 15:13:51 |
| nf | * Is this the blessed way to write an overlay that adds a package foo to all Haskell package sets, without undoing previous overlays? If so, should we add it to the manual? If not, what is?
final: prev: {
haskell = prev.haskell // {
packageOverrides = final.lib.composeExtensions prev.haskell.packageOverrides
(hfinal: hprev: {
foo = ...;
});
};
}
| 15:15:17 |
| maralorn | lgtm | 15:16:00 |
 sterni (he/him) | https://www.haskell.org/ghc/blog/20250702-ghc-release-schedules.html | 22:38:21 |
| maralorn | Yeah. I am wondering what that’s gonna mean for stackage LTS. | 23:08:20 |
| 17 Jul 2025 |
|  kubitess joined the room. | 11:57:34 |
| 18 Jul 2025 |
|  @dmjio:matrix.org set a profile picture. | 00:21:22 |
| @dmjio:matrix.org left the room. | 14:28:22 |
| 19 Jul 2025 |
 Patrick Steele | Indeed, cabal run --enable-profiling myprog -- +RTS -p worked | 21:07:44 |
| Patrick Steele | without modification to the cabal file, i.e. no -prof | 21:08:05 |
| 20 Jul 2025 |
 Profpatsch | gonna switch to 9.14 and never update again | 13:11:26 |
| maralorn | In reply to @profpatsch:augsburg.one
gonna switch to 9.14 and never update again I feel like I am missing context. 🤣 | 22:09:55 |
| 21 Jul 2025 |
| Profpatsch | LTS | 00:09:46 |
 magic_rb | im benchmarking a thing i wrote and im making a nix package out of a cabal file using cabal2nix, however if i change the source cabal file and remove -fllvm, -O2, or -fexpose-all-unfoldings the performance measurements dont seem to change even though im positive they should. Is nixpkgs overwriting my flags somehow? | 09:41:41 |
| magic_rb | im now trying the same bench but build outside of nixpkgs | 09:45:07 |
| maralorn | magic_rb: None of those should be overriden, I think. | 10:02:32 |
| magic_rb | hm | 10:02:39 |
| magic_rb | okay | 10:02:41 |
| magic_rb | than my thing is weird, il running the benches on an interactively compiled version | 10:02:59 |
| magic_rb | yeah same result | 10:03:15 |
| maralorn | Maybe the even appear somewhere in the build log, e.g. in the configureFlags, although I am not sure about that. | 10:03:23 |
| magic_rb | hm, i could swear it made a difference when i was developing this thing, idk why the performance difference vanished, now it doesnt really matter what flags i use | 10:03:47 |
| magic_rb | fun, my thesis is gonna be "well, these did something when i was writing this, now they seemingly dont anymore. IDFK why, future work" | 10:05:12 |
| maralorn | Did you maybe apply expose-all-unfoldings to dependencies as well? That might make a difference. | 10:07:42 |
| magic_rb | not that im aware of | 10:08:10 |
| magic_rb | ghc-options: -Wall -threaded -O2 -fllvm -Wno-unrecognised-pragmas -fspecialise-aggressively -fexpose-all-unfoldings
on my library and executables | 10:08:23 |
