GHC Extensibility

Monique Monteiro monique.louise at
Wed May 30 12:58:36 EDT 2007

On 5/30/07, Simon Peyton-Jones <simonpj at> wrote:
> |  is there any plan to improve GHC's extensibility by providing a
> | simpler way to integrante new backends?  I worked at Haskell.NET
> ...
> | in GHC's code!  I haven't yet figured out how to call the .NET code
> | generator from GHC 6.6.1's main function.  Further, it would be great
> | if there was a better extensibility mechanism (such as a "plugin"
> | infrastructure, for example)  in which it wasn't necessary to use
> | "#ifdef"along the code.  Also, it would be very useful if this
> Yes, good idea.  I think the Right Way to do this is by elaborating the GHC API.  > At the moment it has a baked-in way of generating output files, but presumably > > by elaborating the interface one could allow either
> a) GHC returns some Core, and you finish the job, or
> b) you give to GHC a function to use for code generation

I think b) would be a more elegant option.  Further, in Haskell.NET's
current implementation, we receive the STG tree.

Another question: was there any significant optimization or
performance change in the front-end (ie.: generation of Core/STG tree)
since GHC 6.2.2?


Monique Monteiro, MSc
MCP .NET Framework 2.0 / SCJP / IBM OOAD
Project Manager
Recife Microsoft Innovation Center
+55 81 34198137
monique at
MSN: monique_louise at

More information about the Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list