Excerpts from Andrew Coppin's message of Fri Nov 14 14:13:01 -0600 2008: > Yeah. I figure if I knew enough about this stuff, I could poke code > numbers directly into RAM representing the opcodes of the machine > instructions. Then I "only" need to figure out how to call it from > Haskell. It all sounds pretty non-trivial if you ask me though... ;-)
Save yourself some time: http://hackage.haskell.org/cgi-bin/hackage-scripts/package/harpy Using harpy, you can generate x86 assembly /inside/ your code and execute it, using a DSL. This makes it excellent for code generators and playing around with code generation. Here's a calculator I wrote using it: http://hackage.haskell.org/cgi-bin/hackage-scripts/package/calc For more information, http://uebb.cs.tu-berlin.de/harpy/ > Never heard of LLVM, but from the Wikipedia description it sound like > warm trippy goodness. Pitty there's no Haddock. :-( It's a pretty excellent little system, to be honest. One of the cleanest APIs I've ever used, too (especially for C++.) > [From the build log, it looks like it failed because the build machine > doesn't have the LLVM library installed. Is that really necessary just > for building the docs?] It's necessary to even get through the 'cabal configure' step, since the configure script bundled with the haskell llvm bindings is run then, which checks for the llvm-c headers. Austin. _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
