Hello Ross,
Tuesday, October 3, 2006, 10:33:46 PM, you wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 03, 2006 at 06:06:02PM +0400, Bulat Ziganshin wrote:
>> (i'm moving thread to the ghc-users where this discussion continues in
>> ghc-related aspects)
> I don't see how compiler-independence is a GHC-specific topic.
i m
On Tue, Oct 03, 2006 at 06:06:02PM +0400, Bulat Ziganshin wrote:
> (i'm moving thread to the ghc-users where this discussion continues in
> ghc-related aspects)
I don't see how compiler-independence is a GHC-specific topic.
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mai
Hello John,
(i'm moving thread to the ghc-users where this discussion continues in
ghc-related aspects)
Thursday, September 28, 2006, 3:30:09 AM, you wrote:
>> So, just to confirm in my mind what you are proposing:
>>
>> Compiler/Version specific Core:
>>
>> Yhc.Core, Hugs.Core, GHC.Core
On Fri, Sep 15, 2006 at 05:20:36PM +0100, Ian Lynagh wrote:
>
> As it happens I was working on getting GHC to use cabal to build base
> et al on the plane the other day, and I had a brief look at this.
See my comment in
http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/710
for the results of my long
Hello Ian,
Friday, September 15, 2006, 8:20:36 PM, you wrote:
>> what is a 'base' library now? it is the library that implements common set
>> of operations for latest versions of ghc, hugs and nhc. it contains
>> low-level implementation for ghc, but relies on separate hugsbase
>> package for hu
Hi Bulat,
Just a partial answer for now:
On Wed, Sep 13, 2006 at 12:29:58PM +0400, Bulat Ziganshin wrote:
>
> Friday, September 8, 2006, 5:52:57 AM, you wrote:
>
> what is a 'base' library now? it is the library that implements common set
> of operations for latest versions of ghc, hugs and nh
Hello Neil,
Thursday, September 14, 2006, 6:14:30 PM, you wrote:
>> then, a base library may be written against "virtual Haskell compiler",
>> which provides uniform set of low-level features while 'base' decorates
>> these features with user-friendly interfaces
> Nice idea. There are a few prac
Hi Bulat,
Firstly, as someone who has an interest in at least 5 different
projects which either do use the base libraries, or would like to, I
think this is a great idea! Having the GHC stuff in the base, and
having a massive load of #ifdef's just means that its hard to figure
out whats going on,
(i crosspost my letter into main haskell list because i hope that
proposed solution is of great interest for (discussion with) many
developers)
Hello Ian,
Friday, September 8, 2006, 5:52:57 AM, you wrote:
>> and last question - i don't like inclusion of unix and win32 in a list
>> of core libs.
