Hi Kartik, If you want to modify the runtime of one of Yhc and nhc, then Yhc is really the sensible choice! The nhc runtime is mashed into the program and compiled as one chunk of (not very nice looking) C. The Yhc runtime is entirely separate doing runtime bytecode interpretation - making it much much easier to play with.
Can you describe what you mean as stable? Ability to compile haskell programs? Code change in the runtime? Code change in the compiler? Also, can you give us any information on your debugging stuff, since Yhc already supports some debugging stuff related to Hat in the bytecode - it would be interesting to see how your stuff differs. Thanks Neil On 9/13/06, Kartik Vaddadi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello, I'm building a debugger for Haskell that works by modifying the runtime, and I need to choose between yhc & nhc. Everything I've seen points towards yhc, but I wonder how stable it is. I know it's not stable for production use as a compiler, but as a platform for a debugger? For my purposes, it does not have to work with every program. I find that yhc works fine with almost all of the half-dozen small programs (<1 page) I threw at it, but chokes on many of the hugs demos. So would you suggest I work with yhc rather than nhc? Any comments you can give me are greatly appreciated. Thanks. -- Kartik Vaddadi. Home: www.cse.iitb.ac.in/~kart Blogs: kartik.infogami.com, kartik-log.blogspot.com, kartik-rlog.blogspot.com Alternate mail ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] "50% Reservation, 100% Politics" - Protest the Indian government's decision to increase reservation in private educational institutions (yfemumbai.blogspot.com) _______________________________________________ Yhc mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/yhc
_______________________________________________ Yhc mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/yhc
