<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 6/15/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Neil Mitchell</b> <<a href="mailto:ndmitchell@gmail.com">ndmitchell@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Hi,<br><br>After discussions with Malcolm, there are a number of things that need<br>to be done before Yhc can replace nhc:<br><br>1) Performance: Yhc must perform faster than nhc, we used to, but we<br>don't anymore. Tom is going to investigate.
<br><br>2) Buildability: Malcolm still can't build on his Mac, due to library<br>issues. Tom is going to remove all dependencies on all libraries,<br>which should enable this. Even so, we need some work on the build<br>
system to get the libraries working for him. I think Malcom is the<br>only person who has build system problems, so perhaps we can fix this<br>for him.<br><br>3) Libraries: We need to move to the <a href="http://Haskell.org">
Haskell.org</a> libraries. This may<br>mean increasing our build stuff, or moving to Cabal.<br><br>4) Compatability: We need to compile more programs than nhc, this<br>probably comes down to primitives and libraries.<br><br>
5) Bootstrapping: We need to bootstrap Yhc with itself.<br><br>Moving to one nhc/Yhc derivative is clearly a good thing. If anyone<br>wants to take on any of these tasks, or has insights into how we can<br>do this more quickly, we'd love to hear!
</blockquote><div><br>Well, what's really the problem stopping Yhc from bootstrapping itself yet? Are there spots where Yhc relies on GHC type extensions?<br><br>Cheers,<br>Creighton<br></div><br></div><br>