> * Silly combinations like "an unsafe label" or
> "a dynamic import with a given C-name" don't exist.
But now we have all new silly combinations, like
foreign export "dynexp" foo :: ...
and
foreign export "dynimp" foo :: ....
and
foreign export "&foo" foo :: ...
the extent field needs to be separated into import-extent and
export-extent, I think.
Can we make the "static" optional? It wouldn't introduce any ambiguity,
and it would save characters in the common case.
I like '&', but I'm less sure about '!' - this feels like we're getting
a little too cryptic.
Cheers,
Simon
_______________________________________________
FFI mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ffi
