On 27 June 2016 at 04:11, Edward Z. Yang
I don't understand what the bytecode format has to do here. Since your suggestion is to just store Core you can just compile to object code.
True, I could compile to either as long as I can link it dynamically.
Any input into this? How far away is GHC's current architecture from supporting such a concept?
Well, if you are going to support update you need to make sure that the tag information is more elaborate than what GHC currently supports (a type would just be a Name, which is going to get reused when you recompile.)
Indeed -- like in GHCi when you redefine a named thing, I'd hope to implement an incrementing Name[n] versioning for names. But Core's AST is trivial so it'd be easy to make this kind of transformation.