Hi Paolo,

I agree that this would be useful.  In fact, a couple of years ago I implemented this in GHC, but after some discussion folks were not convinced that it's a good idea.  I don't remember the details but as far as I recall we "agreed to disagree" :-)   The e-mail thread is over here:

http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/glasgow-haskell-users/2010-March/018575.html

The patch should be there too, but I suspect that GHC has moved on since than, but perhaps there's still something useful there.

-Iavor


On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 5:13 AM, Paolo Capriotti <p.capriotti@gmail.com> wrote:
As explained in detail here:
http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/ffi/2012-June/001867.html,
it may be useful to have a form of foreign declaration that creates a
static stub for a haskell function without exporting a symbol.

Here is a ticket for that: http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/7048.

It is not particularly clear how such a declaration would look like
syntactically. In the ticket I proposed the following:

    foreign import ccall myCallbackPtr :: FunPtr (IO ()) = myCallback

but please do suggest better alternatives.

It would also be useful to see some use cases of this new form of
declaration. Library binding authors: would this be a welcome addition
for you?

BR,
Paolo

_______________________________________________
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users