2008/5/9 Claus Reinke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > Ah, I didn't think about the GHC options that change the lexical > > syntax. You're right, using the GHC lexer should be easier. > > > > and, if you do that, you could also make the GHC lexer > squirrel away the comments (including pragmas, if they aren't > already in the AST) someplace safe, indexed by, or at least annotated with, > their source locations, and make this comment/ > pragma storage available via the GHC API. (1a) > > then, we'd need a way to merge those comments and pragmas > back into the output during pretty printing, and we'd have made > the first small step towards source-to-source transformations: making code > survive semantically intact over (pretty . parse). (1b) > > that would still not quite fullfill the GHC API comment ticket (*), > but that was only a quick sketch, not a definite design. it might be > sufficient to let each GHC API client do its own search to associate bits of > comment/pragma storage with bits of AST. > if i understand you correctly, you are going to do (1a), so > if you could add that to the GHC API, we'd only need (1b) > to go from useable-for-analysis-and-extraction to > useable-for-transformation. > > is that going to be a problem?
I'll have a look to see if doing 1a) is possible without too much work. And then if I actually implement something, adding it to the GHC API shouldn't be a problem. David _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe