Re: H-core (was: Re: ~ patterns)

On Feb 1, 2006, at 5:12 AM, Malcolm Wallace wrote:

Taral writes:

...

On 1/31/06, Simon Marlow wrote:

...

I've been swayed by the arguments put forward by the ~- proponents, so I'm not going to champion the removal of ~ any more.

We must find *something* to throw away though! :-)

I still like the idea of splitting Haskell' into Haskell'-core and Haskell'-lazy, and moving ~ and ! patterns into Haskell'-lazy.

The Haskell'98 Report already uses an informal notion of a "core" language, into which other syntactic constructs are translated.

I think in Haskell-prime we ought to define this core precisely and formally.

I'd like to second this.

One can even imagine someone developing a pure H-core compiler, with the fuller language implemented as a pre-processor over the top! (I know at least one person who would prefer to write programs in core rather than Haskell'98...)

In light of the recent post on optimizing core, it seems like this might be a very good way to allow people to optimize their inner loops without having to trick their favorite compiler to do the optimizations they want. Additionally, a standard for core would allow a new level of tool interoperability. Haskell front ends and backends could be cleanly separated along a well-defined border. DrIFT and Haddock and others as well could benefit. Happy could generate core directly.... anyway you get the idea. Rob Dockins Speak softly and drive a Sherman tank. Laugh hard; it's a long way to the bank. -- TMBG