> On 12-Aug-2002, Simon Marlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I'd be equally happy (perhaps happier) if the header file spec was > > removed altogether. In a sense, this would leave the > Haskell part of a > > foreign binding even more portable, because it doesn't have > to specify > > the names of header files which might change between platforms. > > This is a C interface we're talking about, right? > > In C, the name of the header file is part of the API. > It doesn't change between different platforms unless > the API changes. > > Specifying the header name is essential if Haskell > implementations are to > ever apply any type-checking to these foreign interfaces. If > they don't, > then in practice I think Haskell programs using the FFI are > likely to be > less portable, and certainly more error-prone, since they will contain > type errors that may cause problems on one platform but not another.
Specifying the header name is also essential for certain implementations (eg. GHC). I wan't suggesting not supplying the header file at all, just not supplying it in the foreign declaration and not defining it as part of the standard. But I take your point about the header file(s) being a proper part of the API. Cheers, Simon _______________________________________________ FFI mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ffi