eir at cis.upenn.edu
Tue Nov 17 14:29:54 UTC 2015
How does this interact with typechecker plugins? I assume they would still happen in GHC's process.
I've also been thinking about designing and implementing a mechanisms where programmers could specify custom pretty-printers for their types, and GHC would use these pretty-printers in error messages. This action would also probably need to be in the same process.
Would either of these ideas be affected? My guess is "no", because we should be able to be selective in what gets farmed out to the second process and what stays locally.
On Nov 17, 2015, at 5:10 AM, Simon Marlow <marlowsd at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi folks - I've been thinking about changing the way we run interpreted code so that it would be run in a separate process. It turns out this has quite a few benefits, and would let us kill some of the really awkward hacks we have in GHC to work around problems that arise because we're running interpreted code and the compiler on the same runtime.
> I summarised the idea here: https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/RemoteGHCi
> I'd be interested to hear if anyone has any thoughts around this, particularly if doing this would make your life difficult in some way. Are people relying on dynCompileExpr for anything?
> ghc-devs mailing list
> ghc-devs at haskell.org
More information about the ghc-devs