replacing guile with haskell?

Graham Klyne GK at
Mon Oct 20 21:06:17 EDT 2003

At 18:17 17/10/03 -0400, Isaac Jones wrote:
> > Hmmmm.  I may be able to get by without calling haskell functions from C.
> > Most of the work would be done in C, and haskell would just be the "glue"
> > language to let the user flexibly specify what he/she wants done.
>I've always wanted to see some way to do embed Haskell in an
>application the way you can for Guile.  This would be great for
>Embedded Domain-Specific languages :)
>Is that what you've got here?

Separately from this thread, it has recently occurred to me that Haskell is 
an ideal tool for implementing "little languages" [1], particularly when 
they are declarative in nature.

Specifically, Haskell's provision of higher order functions makes it 
relatively easy to translate some input language into a corresponding 
function which can then be directly evaluated, without the need for an 
explicit compilation or interpretation component.  (These are some thoughts 
that I hope to explore further in my own work.)

(Of course, this would apply to any language (ML springs to mind) that 
supports higher order functions.)


[1] [1] Jon Bentley, Little languages, Communications of the ACM, 
29(8):711--21, August 1986.

Graham Klyne
For email:

More information about the Haskell-Cafe mailing list