Re: GHCJS

On 3/08/2011 2:10 PM, Brandon Allbery wrote:

On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 00:31, John Lask wrote:

...

What is really required is a "pluggable" back-end infrastructure - whereby various back-ends could be maintained (or not) at the discretion of their originators and separate to the official ghc back-ends.

I guess I'm confused; I thought the current back-end system *was* that kind of pluggable architecture. I recall a JVM backend being proposed based on it some time back.

my thoughts of pluggable infrastructure include consideration of ffi bindings and library integration as well as command line options i.e. as discussed in this thread with respect of GHC-JS, rather than just backend code generation - i.e. considerations of broader scope than those currently handled.