| ghc/ghci. It's lightweight and its language is properly documented (in the | Haskell 98 report), neither of which can be said of ghc.
I think that’s a little unfair to GHC 😊. If you don't give any language extension flags you get Haskell 98 -- or nowadays Haskell 2010. Simon | -----Original Message----- | From: Hugs-Users <hugs-users-boun...@haskell.org> On Behalf Of Doug McIlroy | Sent: 06 July 2018 15:04 | To: hugs-users@haskell.org | Subject: Re: [Hugs-users] needing some Hugs | | I have little constructive to say on the topic, except that I typically use | hugs in preference to "monstrous" | ghc/ghci. It's lightweight and its language is properly documented (in the | Haskell 98 report), neither of which can be said of ghc. Its rudimentary | instrumentation (:set +s) is more useful than ghc's equivalent, though | admittedly ghc has many debugging features I haven't explored. | | That said, it should be noted that I do not use Haskell (nor, nowadays, any | other language) for writing production code. | | Apropos of language, a couple of years ago I noted that ghc implements 2^99 | languages, not one. (There were 99 non-antonymous language pragmas; there | may be more now.) Who can know what terrors lurk there. | My first attempt to investigate the field (turn on all 99) caused a compiler | panic, since fixed. | | Early on, I encountered a hugs bug: garbage collection in the middle of a | bignum operation caused havoc. | Having never looked at the hugs source before, I was able quite quickly | pinpoint the offending code; the maintainers corrected it almost overnight. | That heart-warming experience hasn't worn off, even though the maintainers | have moved on. | | Doug | _______________________________________________ | Hugs-Users mailing list | Hugs-Users@haskell.org | http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hugs-users _______________________________________________ Hugs-Users mailing list Hugs-Users@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/hugs-users