Re: [Haskell-cafe] Hugs

On 04/20/2016 08:06 PM, Giacomo Tesio wrote:

2016-04-13 17:51 GMT+02:00 David Feuer mailto:david.feuer@gmail.com>:

Yes, this is all a bit tongue-in-cheek, but I really do think that pointing students to an unmaintained language implementation (regardless of the pedagogical reasons) has negative consequences for the functional programming community as a whole.

Today I was looking for a simplified version of Haskell that could compete in size with Lua or Wren. Nothing exist.

I thought: oh... but what about Hugs98? Not Lua sized, but still better than GHC! Let see the age of the last related mail in haskell-cafe... you can't imagine my surprise reading this thread!

GHC *is* too complex for a wide variety of use case. Porting Hugs to an new operative system used to be approachable for a single programmer, GHC have never been.

Is this a language issue? I don't think so... but apparently, despite the abundance of language hackers in the Haskell community, nobody still tried to prove that an interpreter for the core Haskell language can be written in a reasonable amount of C code.

You are contradicting yourself. Mark P Jones and other "language hackers" who contributed to Hugs have already proven that. That no-one seems to be willing to maintain Hugs may indicate that there aren't as many use cases as you claim.

Thus, to my money (and admittedly for my own use cases), if somebody renew the interest around a simpler Haskell implementation, he's going to have a really *positive *effect.

Would you put your money where your mouth is? I'm sure you would find someone who could maintain and improve Hugs for you. Roman