Hi Richard, I believe that this is mostly due to plugin development happening to satisfy a plugin need. I doubt there is a grand unified vision for plugins. And I don't have one either. I've dabbled with codegen plugins a long time ago, these days I'm primarily concerned with plugins having a chance to work in cross compilation settings, and even that is still a very uncharted area, but Luite has come up with a hack and Sylvain is making progress :-) We still don't have the cabal side fixes, where we'd need some `plugin-depends` stanza, but all that only makes sense, once we have the fundamentals for plugins disentangled in ghc.
I agree that a discussion on discourse might help. But we won't know without trying. On Tue, Aug 31, 2021 at 9:34 PM Richard Eisenberg <li...@richarde.dev> wrote: > Hi all, > > I have seen a few posts from Sam Derbyshire here asking for feedback about > plugin API design, and the responses have been minimal. This poses a design > challenge, because the GHC folk who design the interface are sometimes > distinct from the people who use the interface. We're trying to be good, > seeking feedback from real, live clients. Is there a better way to do so > than this mailing list? Example: we could create a Category on > discourse.haskell.org, if that would reach the audience better. Or we > could make a repo with issue trackers somewhere simply to track plugin > design. What would work? > > (I recognize that I'm asking in a perhaps-ineffective channel for advice, > but I really don't have a better idea right now. Maybe some of you plugin > authors are here and will point us in a better direction.) > > Thanks, > Richard > _______________________________________________ > ghc-devs mailing list > ghc-devs@haskell.org > http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs >
_______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
