Hi John, > Alan - I do NOT want to generate Haskell code. I want only to generate AST > and compile it. > The question about generating the code was only to have a "debugging tool" > - to see if the generated AST is good - I wanted to generate the Haskell > code only to check if its correct, but normally I would not do it, because > it makes no sense to generate AST -> code -> AST (by GHC) again etc :) > Additional - I want to connect to GHC's type-checking also and translate > the errors to be appropriate to my language syntax - so maybe the pure GHC > API is the best way to go?
I don't know what kind of language you're writing, but I don't think that this is the easiest approach. Just trying to convert a GHC error in something meaningful for your language sounds like a quite painful undertaking, which will end in some big heuristic algorithm. I think, that getting good and meaningful errors for your language you will need to do it by yourself. The result will be easier to maintain and extend. I don't quite understand why you're thinking that GHC is at all the right tool. Well, I don't know exactly what you're really trying to do, but have you already looked at LLVM (http://llvm.org/)? Greetings, Daniel _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
