My 2p worth - Making ExtCore more or less = IfaceSyn is probably a good plan. Significant changes in IfaceSyn force changes in ExtCore, even if the latter is separately defined.
- I don't have a strong opinion about textual vs binary. It's indeed an interesting idea to make Ext Core = .hi files with full bodies. - It shouldn't be hard to clarify IfaceSyn's dependencies so that a standalone library that can read IfaceSyn could be carved out of GHC just by selecting modules X,Y and Z. IfaceSyn is *designed* to have few dependences, so that it is easy to serialise. Simon | -----Original Message----- | From: Neil Mitchell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | Sent: 02 July 2007 22:26 | To: Aaron Tomb | Cc: Simon Peyton-Jones; [email protected] | Subject: Re: More External Core questions | | Hi Aaron, | | > So, yeah, perhaps External Core should be essentially a textual | > representation of a .hi file. | | Textual is something I doubt has much benefit. Yhc.Core has no textual | syntax, and we've never wanted one. How about .hcr being just .hi but | with complete bodies for all functions? | | If you do pick that route, you may end up with a lot less maintenance | work, and can spend more time implementing a standalone library for | reading GHC Core :-) | | Thanks | | Neil _______________________________________________ Cvs-ghc mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-ghc
