Let's get this finished

[Sven Panne]

Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk wrote:
> [...] If language separation is realistic, we would also keep
> errno handling outside basic Foreign.

Hmmm, indeed. `CErrors' or `CErrno' would be a good name IMHO.

> But it yields several separate C-specific modules...
> 
> module CForeign?
> 
> It would reexport Foreign, CTypes, CTypesISO, MarshalCString and
> CErrors (or whatever they will be called).

I'd second that (with the small addition that MarshalCString is
replaced by CString/CStringLen).

> BTW, why are CTypes and CTypesISO separate?

CTypes handles what I consider "builtin" types of the C language
itself and CTypesISO handles library-related types defined by the
ISO standard. And a more pragmatic reason: Compilation times and
memory resources during compilation are already large enough in
the current state of affairs...

Cheers,
   Sven