Hello David,
Thursday, November 12, 2009, 10:22:41 AM, you wrote:
are you seen hugs, for example? i think that ghc is slow because it's
written in haskell and compiled by itself
If I understood, Evan is interested in ideas to speed up compilation.
As far as I know, hugs is an interpreter,
Hello Neil,
Thursday, November 12, 2009, 1:57:06 PM, you wrote:
I'd really love a faster GHC!
there are few obvious ideas:
1) use Binary package for .hi files
2) allow to save/load bytecode
3) allow to run program directly from .hi files w/o linking
4) save mix of all .hi files as program
Hello Rafal,
Thursday, November 12, 2009, 3:10:54 PM, you wrote:
it's impossible to interpret haskell - how can you do type inference?
hugs, like ghci, is bytecode interpreter. the difference is their
implementation languages - haskell vs C
We use Standard ML for the Isabelle/HOL theorem
Hello Peter,
Thursday, November 12, 2009, 3:26:21 PM, you wrote:
incremental is just a word. what exactly we mean? ghc, like any other
.obj-generating compiler, doesn't recompile unchanged source files (if
their dependencies aren't changed too). otoh, (my old ghc 6.6)
recompiles Main.hs if
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 12:39 PM, Bulat Ziganshin bulat.zigans...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hello Peter,
Thursday, November 12, 2009, 3:26:21 PM, you wrote:
incremental is just a word. what exactly we mean?
Incremental linking means the general idea of reusing previous linking
results, only
