On Oct 26, 2006, at 3:37 AM, Simon Marlow wrote:
Peter Tanski wrote:
Do you keep GranSim and PAR in the main GHC code for
compatibility or
are they leftovers that haven't been cleaned up yet?
They are in the tree pending a future update of the PAR/GRAN code; but
it now looks like the GPH developers would prefer that the old code be
removed from the tree entirely, so at some point we'll do that. It's
not a big deal, actually I'd prefer if it was left in for now because
I'm making changes to the GC and if I can avoid conflicts it'll
save me
time.
I'll gladly stay away from it then. Less work to do :)
For that
matter, do you want to keep .NET code around for future reference or
would someone (say, me) be able to clean that up as well?
You mean the ILX stuff, or foreign import dotnet? ILX I think is
dead,
I'm not so sure about foreign import dotnet.
I actually meant both. In a patch from 04 October (this year), with
the name beginning "Remove ILX from the GHC altogether ..." Simon
Peyton-Jones removed ILX stuff from the Haskell-code in the compiler:
M ./compiler/main/CodeOutput.lhs -27
M ./compiler/main/DriverPhases.hs -4
M ./compiler/main/DynFlags.hs -4 +1
M ./compiler/stgSyn/CoreToStg.lhs -13
M ./compiler/typecheck/TcForeign.lhs -3 +1
In a message you sent on 18 May 2005 to the FFI mailing list (at
http://www.mail-archive.com/ffi@haskell.org/msg01814.html), in
reference to the FFI syntax "foreign type..." you mentioned the
experiment to have GHC generate code for .NET. (I am not sure what
you meant--maybe bytecode, so the .NET-FFI is still live?)
Cheers,
Pete
_______________________________________________
Cvs-ghc mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-ghc
