Ben, Matthew, Moritz, and friends Is this wiki page about architectures still accurate? https://gitlab.haskell.org/ghc/ghc/-/wikis/platforms
For example, ARM is not Tier 1, or "apple silicon". Yet I know some of our developers have invested lots of effort in other architectures, so maybe those efforts are not reflected here. Relevant is Moritz's post about 32-bit architectures <https://discourse.haskell.org/t/running-project-built-on-raspberry-pi-with-cabal-gives-weird-errors/2429/6> . We should in due course add Javascript and Web Assembly as Tier 1 back ends? Are we saying "if your customer bases uses Tier 2 architectures, you can't rely on GHC from one release to the next"? I wonder if there are companies for which Tier-2 architectures are mission-critical. Mis-aligned expectations cause upset. I mention all this because it is relevant to our stability guarantees. Every time we release we should point to this list. Simon
_______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
