On 12-Aug-2002, Simon Marlow <simonmar@microsoft.com> wrote:

...

I'd be equally happy (perhaps happier) if the header file spec was removed altogether. In a sense, this would leave the

Haskell part of a

...

foreign binding even more portable, because it doesn't have to specify the names of header files which might change between platforms.

This is a C interface we're talking about, right?

In C, the name of the header file is part of the API. It doesn't change between different platforms unless the API changes.

Specifying the header name is essential if Haskell implementations are to ever apply any type-checking to these foreign interfaces. If they don't, then in practice I think Haskell programs using the FFI are likely to be less portable, and certainly more error-prone, since they will contain type errors that may cause problems on one platform but not another.

Specifying the header name is also essential for certain implementations (eg. GHC). I wan't suggesting not supplying the header file at all, just not supplying it in the foreign declaration and not defining it as part of the standard. But I take your point about the header file(s) being a proper part of the API. Cheers, Simon