2011/4/1 Johan Tibell <[email protected]>: > Hi Gábor, > > There are a few non-Cabal projects on the ideas list > (http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/summer-of-code/report/1). Just > thought I mentioned it in case you missed it.
I saw it :) > > 2011/4/1 Gábor Lehel <[email protected]>: >> Alternately, I'd be very happy to receive suggestions >> about other GHC-related work which would be considered appropriate. >> (Or, heck, any other compiler.) > > Perhaps you could send an email to the GHC mailing list and ask if > they have any good GSoC projects? I'm not sure the Simons are reading > every post on this list. Oh, hmm. Good idea. Should've cross-posted from the beginning :|. What's the accepted etiquette here? Forward the original message? Send a short heads-up with a link to this thread in the archives? > >> A related problem is that, having done only minimal GHC hacking so >> far, drawing up a detailed plan / design in advance as part of the >> proposal would be difficult. If this is considered necessary and there >> is someone willing to mentor the project I'd be happy to research the >> problem in advance of the submission deadline so I can submit a more >> detailed proposal. Alternately, if it's deemed acceptable to learn the >> ropes / come up to speed as part of the SoC itself that's fine by me >> as well. (Wasn't this sort of the point originally?) > > It's not required but it helps. Us mentors need to figure out if > you're likely to finish your project or not. Showing that you > understand what needs to be done is a good sign. If you're not sure > what needs to be done there's still a chance you'll get accepted if > people who already know GHC thinks one summer is enough time to both > get familiar with GHC and add something worthwhile. > >> Background info: I've taken part in the SoC once before, back in 2006 >> (when I applied to KDE to work on Krita). I don't yet have any Hackage >> packages to my name, however I'm working on a C++-to-Haskell bindings >> generator for my bachelor's thesis (the primary target being Qt*) >> which is likely to spawn quite a few. (I've avoided making any noise >> about this because I didn't want to put the cart before the horse: the >> plan was (and still is) to announce something once there is something >> worth announcing, and it's not at that point quite yet.) > > How about adding Haskell support for SWIG? Being able to call C++ > libraries from Haskell would be very useful. Maybe I have a case of NIH, but I'm not very familiar with SWIG either :). None of the other Qt/KDE bindings for other languages use it, and as far as I can remember the rationale was that it's too limited. Based on this assumption I never felt the inclination to learn about it, either. That said, "being able to call C++ from Haskell" is pretty much what the bindings generator I'm working on aims to accomplish. (For certain kinds of libraries -- object-oriented ones which make only limited use of templates, essentially.) Adding C++ support to the FFI (per my previous message) would still have considerable value-added in comparison to this -- not having to call a generator is always a plus, and it would also be somewhat orthogonal and lower-level (parts of the generated bindings could be switched over to use it internally, for example). > > Cheers, > Johan > -- Work is punishment for failing to procrastinate effectively. _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
