Stefan O'Rear wrote:
Actually, there exists no interpreter for Haskell. Period.
Haskell has never been implemented. Every implementation has a large
collection of corner cases that aren't correctly parsed; these can be
recognized as the wontfix bugs.
Erm... I'm having a "there is no spoon" moment here... Feeling quite
lost now...
OTOH, GHCi just takes an expression, parses it and interprets it. This
Haha, no.
GHCi takes an expression, parses it, wraps it in module Main { main =
print (expr) }, type checks it, transforms it to Core, optimizes,
transforms to STG, optimizes, transforms to object code for a bytecode
machine, links it, and emulates the result. Three times, since it
needs to try each of expr, expr >>= print, and print expr.
Hugs is also a full compiler, but for some dumb reason doesn't support
saving the object code to disk, so you have to recompile everything
each time.
I once write a trivial little Tcl script that could parse and execute a
biggish subset of Haskell. Given that there are minds out there awesom
enough to write an efficient Haskell compiler, you'd think a naive
little interpreter for running small expressions wouldn't post much of a
problem...
appears to be a *much* more lightweight approach. I have had some
Not at all. GHCi seems much faster because GHC's nontrivial startup
overhead is amortized over the entire run.
I...see... I think... hmm...
Whatever... I'd just like to see an online way to run Haskell, and since
the Lambdabot webpage still shows no sign of working...
That's my fault - I designed a much simpler configuration interface
for lambdabot, but nobody has been motivated to un-bitrot GOA yet.
Um... what's GOA?
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
