[Haskell] Improvements to GHC
S.Karrmann at web.de
Sat Nov 19 05:15:29 EST 2005
My 2 cents:
John Lask (Thu, Nov 17, 2005 at 08:57:52AM +1030):
> I would like to sound out the Haskell community on what the feeling are
> most desirable to improve the "commerciality" (i.e. its general use) of ghc
> and Haskell in general (as distinct from feature set)
> 3) Macro / conditional compilation / compiler meta language / additional
> binding forms
> These are perhaps distinct issues but can be discussed together.
> The prevalent use of #ifdef and the cpp is indicative of the general
> need to have some standard means by
> which differences between compilers ghc/hugs/nhc can be accommodated for
> in the source code.
> To date this issue has not been tackled in any meaningful way, perhaps
> we can continue
> to use cpp but for the sake of portability
> A means of defining additional binding forms would be nice as it would
> further facilitate embedded dsl
> for which Haskell is pre-eminent, and which use is a great motivator
> for venturing into
> Haskell in the first place.
The macro languages tend to become more and more complex over time.
Eventually, you have two complex languages. First, a Haskell Macro
Language, second Haskell.
Why can we not use staging like in Omega, cf. , or Template Haskell?
Maybe Haskell itself can generate the compiler and system specific source?
More information about the Haskell