Creating stubs statically

[Iavor Diatchki]

Hi Paolo,

I agree that this would be useful.  In fact, a couple of years ago I
implemented this in GHC, but after some discussion folks were not convinced
that it's a good idea.  I don't remember the details but as far as I recall
we "agreed to disagree" :-)   The e-mail thread is over here:

http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/glasgow-haskell-users/2010-March/018575.html

The patch should be there too, but I suspect that GHC has moved on since
than, but perhaps there's still something useful there.

-Iavor


On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 5:13 AM, Paolo Capriotti <p.capriotti at gmail.com>wrote:

> As explained in detail here:
> http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/ffi/2012-June/001867.html,
> it may be useful to have a form of foreign declaration that creates a
> static stub for a haskell function without exporting a symbol.
>
> Here is a ticket for that: http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/7048
> .
>
> It is not particularly clear how such a declaration would look like
> syntactically. In the ticket I proposed the following:
>
>     foreign import ccall myCallbackPtr :: FunPtr (IO ()) = myCallback
>
> but please do suggest better alternatives.
>
> It would also be useful to see some use cases of this new form of
> declaration. Library binding authors: would this be a welcome addition
> for you?
>
> BR,
> Paolo
>
> _______________________________________________
> Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
> Glasgow-haskell-users at haskell.org
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/glasgow-haskell-users/attachments/20120705/5909978d/attachment.htm>