runhaskell rather than runghc

Bas van Dijk v.dijk.bas at
Sun Sep 30 05:08:19 EDT 2007

On 9/30/07, Serge D. Mechveliani <mechvel at> wrote:
> Dear GHC and Cabal developers and users,
> I suggest to use  `runhaskell'  rather than  `runghc'.
> Because it looks to have more sense, and also for political correctness.
> Cabal is a tool for `making' various Haskell implementations.
> In 2015, we may have implementations  ghc, Hugs, hbc, foo_1, ..., foo_n.
> Does Cabal need to provide  runghc, runhugs, runhbc ... runfoo_n ?
> Do I mistake?

Earlier this year, Sven Panne provided[1] a good reason not to
directly install 'runhaskell':




More information about the Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list