Frederik Eaton wrote: > Scripts are tidy, since they're also a source file and you don't have > to worry about keeping a separate binary executable up to date. I'm > sure this topic has been well discussed on the vast internet. For > instance, look at Setup.hs in Cabal. That could be called a script, > because it is rarely compiled, although it doesn't have the advantage > of being executable via the kernel, which most other scripts on Unix > do.
It could easily be executed directly, though, if you use File.lhs, so that it can have a #!/usr/bin/runhaskell at the top. Dave _______________________________________________ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
