Fergus Henderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote,
> On 25-Nov-1999, Eduardo Costa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Fergus Henderson
> > Why a compiler should be small, and produce small code, etc?
>
> > Conclusion: I think that we should look for groups interested
> > in producing a Haskell compiler. A friend of mine also
> > suggested trying to lure Clean team to eliminate the
> > small incompatibilities that their system have with
> > Haskell. If a Clean feature is important and
> > significative, it would be let alone (for instance,
> > unique types are fine). If it only makes the code hard
> > to read for Haskell programmers, it would be changed. An
> > example is the notation for list patterns (Clean could
> > change [x:y} to (x:y)). Other examples: Module handling,
> > type declarations, etc.
>
> That is a very good idea, IMHO. Developing a Haskell front-end for the
> Clean compiler should not be _that_ much work, I would expect.
> And the two languages are similar enough that it seems to make little
> sense to have two different syntaxes.
This issue came up in the IFL'99 workshop this summer and,
IRC, there are a quite a number of not so obvious problems
to realise full Haskell support. Rinus didn't seem to
enthusiastic about the idea (the plans for the new Clean
system are quite ambitious and need a lot of work, and a
full Haskell frontend would definitely tie up considerable
man power).
Manuel
