On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 8:51 AM, Aleksi Nurmi <[email protected]> wrote:
> Now that I think of it, is there a compelling reason not to use GHC
> for native code compilation? It is stable and in active development.

Yes: the longer the dependency chain for BitC, the harder it is to adopt.

> Many recent languages such as Agda actually target Haskell...

Research languages can afford to do that. BitC has been intended from
the beginning to end up a production language.

I have a lot of respect for GHC, but having one strange new language
depend on a second strange language (in the eyes of the mainstream)
would be problematic, and it doesn't seem like we need that extra
dependency.

shap
_______________________________________________
bitc-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev

Reply via email to