Absolutely, let's get this code upstream. Just put it up on Phabricator and I'll be happy to review.
I recall that we wanted to split up the ghci lib into modules that are compiled with stage0 (the client) and modules compiled with stage1 (the server). Is that a part of your plans? I think it would be a good cleanup. Cheers Simon On 14 January 2017 at 15:34, Shea Levy <s...@shealevy.com> wrote: > Hi Simon, devs, > > As part of my work to get TH working when cross-compiling to iOS, I've > developed remote-iserv [1] (not yet on hackage), a set of libraries for > letting GHC communicate with an external interpreter that may be on > another machine. So far, there are only three additions of note on top > of what the ghci library offers: > > 1. The remote-iserv protocol has facilities for the host sending > archives and object files the target doesn't have (dynlibs not yet > implemented but there's no reason they can't be). This works by > having the server send back a Bool after a loadObj or loadArchive > indicating whether it needs the object sent, and then just reading it > off the Pipe. > 2. The remote-iserv lib abstracts over how the Pipe it communicates over > is obtained. One could imagine e.g. an ssh-based implementation that > just uses stdin and stdout* for the communication, the implementation > I've actually tested on is a TCP server advertised over bonjour. > 3. There is a protocol version included to address forwards > compatibility concerns. > > As the library currently stands, it works for my use case. However, > there would be a number of benefits if it were included with ghc (and > used for local iserv as well): > > 1. Reduced code duplication (the server side copies iserv/src/Main.hs > pretty heavily) > 2. Reduced overhead keeping up to date with iserv protocol changes > 3. No need for an extra client-side process, GHC can just open the Pipe > itself > 4. Proper library distribution in the cross-compiling case. The client > needs to be linked with the ghci lib built by the stage0 compiler, as > it runs on the build machine, while the server needs to be linked > with the ghci lib built by the stage1 compiler. With a distribution > created by 'make install', we only get the ghci lib for the > target. Currently, I'm working around this by just using the ghci lib > of the bootstrap compiler, which in my case is built from the same > source checkout, but of course this isn't correct. If these libs were > upstream, we'd only need one version of the client lib exposed and > one version of the server lib exposed and could have them be for the > build machine and the target, respectively > 5. Better haskell hackers than I invested in the code ;) > > Thoughts on this? Would this be welcome upstream in some form? > > Thanks, > Shea > > * Note that, in the general case, having the server process's stdio be > the same as the compiler's (as we have in the local-iserv case) is not > possible. Future work includes adding something to the protocol to > allow forwarding stdio over the protocol pipe, to make GHCi usable > without watching the *server*'s console. > > [1]: https://github.com/obsidiansystems/remote-iserv >
_______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs