> By using an explicit Lava compiler you declare that this is > indeed a Lava > program, and you don't expect it to work in any other > setting, in particular > not with a Haskell compiler like GHC. > > ... > > And in the same line of thinking, I would want a way of > specifying suffixes > of input source files. It would be much neater to call your > files Foo.lava > or similar, and be able to tell GHC to treat them as normal > .hs files, i.e.
Where is the difficulty in writing lavac as a program which: - generates .hs files from .lava - inserts appropriate import statements - invokes GHC "as the back end"? This seems to be a nicer (more modular?) solution than contorting GHC. And I think it would make it easier to use other Haskell compilers, should you wish too. ----------------------------------------- ***************************************************************** Confidentiality Note: The information contained in this message, and any attachments, may contain confidential and/or privileged material. It is intended solely for the person(s) or entity to which it is addressed. Any review, retransmission, dissemination, or taking of any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient(s) is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. ***************************************************************** _______________________________________________ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users