From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Theo Honohan MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Subject: Re: [9fans] haskell (was Re: C++ compiler anyone?) In-Reply-To: <200108011408.KAA20673@augusta.math.psu.edu> References: <200107311755.NAA15973@augusta.math.psu.edu> <200108011408.KAA20673@augusta.math.psu.edu> Message-Id: Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 15:02:26 +0100 Topicbox-Message-UUID: d8924a8c-eac9-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025 On Wednesday 1 August, Dan Cross wrote ("Re: [9fans] C++ compiler anyone?"): > > In article , > Theo Honohan <9fans@cse.psu.edu> wrote: > >No, but hugs should be very easy. GHC, on the other hand, would > >probably be quite a handful. > > Yes, that's what I thought as well. GHC would be prefered, but > is non-trivial to port. Also, I think the GHC runtime is currently being redesigned and reimplemented, so it's probably not a great time to start a port. Perhaps the thing to do is to track the progress one of the open source implementations of the Microsoft .NET CLR. It's already targetted by many compilers for other functional languages, and official GHC support is on the way.