Hello,
On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 2:50 PM, Neil Mitchell
Hi
Some good reasons for having a separate interface are: they can be human-readable and human-writable (ghc's do not fulfill this criterion); they can be used to bootstrap mutually recursive modules in the absence of any object files (ghc uses .hs-boot files instead); other tools can extract information about modules without having to understand either the full Haskell syntax or the object language.
An additional reason is that for some changes of .hs file (where just the implementation changes) the .o file can be regenerated without touching the .hi file. This allows more accurate build dependencies and less recompilation.
Is that really the case? I thought that GHC may add code to the interface files for cross-module inlining purposes, which means that changing the implementation might change the interface too. -Iavor