Building as dependency with Stack runs out of memory

[viviag]

commercialhaskell/stack#3637

It's all true for current version also.

[klappvisor]

hm, interesting. Thanks for reporting it, I can try to reproduce it using stack v1.6.1

[decentral1se]

You were able to reproduce it @klappvisor?

[ibnuda]

Oh, I should have posted this comment to here. Sorry.

[fizruk]

This might have to do with either

• having a huge unifying TelegramBotAPI type (and deriving client for that);
• having a lot of Generic-based deriving for large record types.

Because I couldn't have telegram-api built successfully and fast enough on my laptop, I have rewritten a part of Telegram API while working on an experimental high-level Telegram bot package https://github.com/fizruk/telegram-bot-simple.

Specifically, I have chosen to

• have a separate type and client derivation per endpoint;
• use deriveJSON via Template Haskell to speed up the build (for large record types, such as Message).

My package builds a lot faster and requires much less memory than telegram-api and already can do most of the useful stuff, so I guess you could borrow those 2 ideas to make this package great build fast again :)

[why-not-try-calmer]

This might have to do with either

• having a huge unifying TelegramBotAPI type (and deriving client for that);
• having a lot of Generic-based deriving for large record types.

Because I couldn't have telegram-api built successfully and fast enough on my laptop, I have rewritten a part of Telegram API while working on an experimental high-level Telegram bot package https://github.com/fizruk/telegram-bot-simple.

Specifically, I have chosen to

• have a separate type and client derivation per endpoint;
• use deriveJSON via Template Haskell to speed up the build (for large record types, such as Message).

My package builds a lot faster and requires much less memory than telegram-api and already can do most of the useful stuff, so I guess you could borrow those 2 ideas to make this package great build fast again :)

But you don't provide support for webhook, do you?