Dear GHC and Cabal developers and users, I suggest to use `runhaskell' rather than `runghc'. Because it looks to have more sense, and also for political correctness. Cabal is a tool for `making' various Haskell implementations. In 2015, we may have implementations ghc, Hugs, hbc, foo_1, ..., foo_n. Does Cabal need to provide runghc, runhugs, runhbc ... runfoo_n ?
Do I mistake? Regards, ----------------- Serge Mechveliani [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
