I'd say (1) and (3) are good, but we typically don't do (2) in the compiler.
On the other hand, if you want to export a clean and self-contained API for the parser from the GHC module, I think that would be great. There is GHC.parser for parsing a whole module, but I'm sure a more complete API would be useful.
Cheers, Simon On 31/05/2014 04:09, Andrew Gibiansky wrote:
Hello, I would like to be able to use the GHC API for parsing. Right now this is in the Parser and Lexer modules: Parser: http://www.haskell.org/ghc/docs/7.8.2/html/libraries/ghc-7.8.2/Parser.html Lexer: http://www.haskell.org/ghc/docs/7.8.2/html/libraries/ghc-7.8.2/Lexer.html GHC currently exposes only a few parsers here. I'd like to make a few modifications: 1. Expose a few more parsers than currently are exposed in the Parser module. In particular, I'd like import statements, type signatures, declarations, and expressions, at least, in addition to what's already there. 2. Re-export some things from Lexer from Parser, since they're reused. This would include unP, PState, and the 2-3 other core things you /have/ to use in order to use the GHC Parser. 3. Add some Haddock documentation to the top of the Parser module describing how to use it, since the types themselves are pretty opaque here. I think (1) and (3) are definitely a good idea, not so sure about (2) though IMHO it would be convenient for using the Parser. Would this make for an acceptable patch? Thoughts? -- Andrew Gibiansky _______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
_______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
