| How does one deal cleanly with implementation differences, | e.g. things like isAscii being defined in Hugs but not in | GHC? I'd hate to resort to Makefile trickery and preprocessing. isAscii is certainly defined in GHC. It's in module Char, like the language definition says. | Btw, the reason I want to run the same sources with Hugs and | GHC is that I have a compiler whose parser is generated with | Happy. Provided you stick to Haskell98, the same sources should run on both. | Compiling the parser on a smallish computer takes ages | and I don't need the efficiency at this stage anyway. On the | other hand, I find the error messages given by GHC very good. | If someone can suggest another compiler to try out or a way | to reduce the time needed for compiling the parser, I'd be | grateful. The parser is about 3500 lines of Haskell. Hugs compiles really fast. The interactive version of GHC compiles much slower, but much faster than the batch version. ghc --interactive. [GHC 5.02 at least.] Simon