Frank A. Christoph wrote:
> .... The number of times GHC has been too slow and
> memory-hungry for me indicates that Haskell is not suitable for writing
> anything as general-purpose as a compiler.
Maybe it is because GHC is doing some things that are difficult ;) Oh I know
a C++ compiler is handling complicated things (but only because the design of
C++ is brain damaged). Haskell is well designed (not neccessarily in every
detail but more as a whole) and has some features that need memory to compile.
I know of C++ programms with ca. 10.000 lines that take about 20 (twenty !!)
minutes to compile with egcs 1.1 on a 300Mhz pentium II. So there does GHC stand ?
pfitzen
