replacing guile with haskell?
GK at ninebynine.org
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" , 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.)
  Jon Bentley, Little languages, Communications of the ACM,
29(8):711--21, August 1986.
More information about the Haskell-Cafe