On Mon, Oct 14, 2002 at 11:07:27AM +0100, Malcolm Wallace wrote:
and if we are adding things to the FFI spec, how about the empty data declaration? it is painfully simple to implement and would make FFI code a lot cleaner as it tends to depend heavily on placeholder types..
Hugs and ghc already have it (AFAIK). I recently added it to nhc98. Do you think it should become a formal part of the FFI standard? Or is it best left as another "common" extension of Haskell'98 that just happens to be implemented everywhere?
yeah, I would like to see the extension in the FFI, because it will probably never make it in anywhere else and it makes FFI code so much cleaner/more readable. I'd almost like to see it considered a 'misprint' in the haskell report and fixed there, but I'd settle for the FFI. Since every compiler supports it, we should put it in, rather then encourage everyone to write technically 'non-portable' code, by providing the perfect use for it in the FFI but not the extension itself. John -- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- John Meacham - California Institute of Technology, Alum. - john@foo.net ---------------------------------------------------------------------------