[GHC] #9015: A documented way to differentiate between statements, declarations, imports, etc.
GHC
ghc-devs at haskell.org
Sun Apr 20 19:46:55 UTC 2014
#9015: A documented way to differentiate between statements, declarations,
imports, etc.
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: splinterofchaos | Owner:
Type: feature request | Status: new
Priority: normal | Milestone:
Component: GHC API | Version: 7.8.2
Keywords: | Operating System: Unknown/Multiple
Architecture: Unknown/Multiple | Type of failure: Documentation
Difficulty: Moderate (less | bug
than a day) | Test Case:
Blocked By: | Blocking:
Related Tickets: |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
I'm working on a little REPL and the GHC API seems to supply two functions
for evaluating one line, without compiling and evaluating into an
`HValue`, which doesn't seem to have an `Outputable` instace: `runStmt`
and `runDecls`. As it turns out, I need slightly different code to run on
declarations verses statements, so this makes sense, but given a random
string from the user, how can I tell the difference? I don't see anything
in the documentation about this.
I took a look at ghci's source
(https://github.com/ghc/ghc/blob/a6f2c852d49313fa8acea2deb3741ab86c6ef995/ghc/InteractiveUI.hs#L862])
and it looks like they just peek at the first word of the input, and that
may be correct and sufficient, but impossible to verify without looking at
Haskell's grammar. But even if I did verify it, that doesn't make explicit
the difference between what `runDecls` and `runStmt` will accept.
For a contrived example, consider if GHC implemented a feature that
allowed for a new type of decl. It might be enabled by a language
extension which means that testing whether a string is a statement or
declaration cannot be done purely as we have to check the dynflags.
Furthermore, the client may not be aware of the extension and thus send
the input to `runStmt` instead.
It would seem to me that requiring the user to manually parse the input
violates separation of concerns since truly GHC knows best what source GHC
will accept. The user should not have to examine the input except for if
they need to modify or interpret it as something other than Haskell source
code.
The GHC API should either document an example function for differentiating
declarations from statements (and even import statements), supply one
itself, or supply several along the lines of `isDecl, isStmt, isImport ::
String -> Bool`. This would improve ease-of-use by making client code more
obvious and correct.
--
Ticket URL: <http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/9015>
GHC <http://www.haskell.org/ghc/>
The Glasgow Haskell Compiler
More information about the ghc-tickets
mailing list