Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers book in Haskell

A swapped order probably appeals to most haskellers (by contrast I first learned ML). The real difference is that the Haskell books will focus on lazy languages. If your tastes are in implementing fast lazy languages using graph reduction then you may also be interested in [1]: although I haven't

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers book in Haskell

You beat me to it although I'd reverse the order of your list. Also I wouldn't ignore the classic, http://www.amazon.com/Compilers-Principles-Techniques-Tools-Edition/dp/0321486811 but know that it has next to nothing useful specific to FP languages, and certainly not lazy languages. Tommy On Ap

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers book in Haskell

I disagree about the recommendation for Modern Compiler Design: I found it to be a pretty good introduction to compiler technology, but not functional programming with compilers, it's coverage was *very* shallow. By contrast, I can recommend both Compiling with Continuations (the "standard" text o

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers book in Haskell

On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 10:34 PM, Andrés Sicard-Ramírez < andres.sicard.rami...@gmail.com> wrote: > Juan, te puede interesar > > On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 5:56 PM, Sergey Bushnyak < > sergey.bushn...@sigrlami.eu> wrote: > >> I will recommend you book "Modern Compiler Design" by Dick Grune and >> other

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers book in Haskell

Books about compilers is rare artifact, in comparison to some technology books. It is uncommon to see topics on compilers for functional languages. I was surprised, when saw it in "Modern Compiler Design", which I've mentioned earlier. "Compiler design" series from Springer maybe reveal topics

[Haskell-cafe] Compilers book in Haskell

Juan, te puede interesar On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 5:56 PM, Sergey Bushnyak wrote: > I will recommend you book "Modern Compiler Design" by Dick Grune and > others. > Besides discussing different topics, authors use Haskell as example for > describing ideas behind compilers for functional language.

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers: Why do we need a core language?

On 11/25/12 11:08 PM, Richard O'Keefe wrote: On 24/11/2012, at 5:26 PM, wren ng thornton wrote: On 11/20/12 6:54 AM, c...@lavabit.com wrote: Hello, I know nothing about compilers and interpreters. I checked several books, but none of them explained why we have to translate a high-level langu

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers: Why do we need a core language?

On 24/11/2012, at 5:26 PM, wren ng thornton wrote: > On 11/20/12 6:54 AM, c...@lavabit.com wrote: >> Hello, >> >> I know nothing about compilers and interpreters. I checked several >> books, but none of them explained why we have to translate a >> high-level language into a small (core) language

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers: Why do we need a core language?

On 11/20/12 6:54 AM, c...@lavabit.com wrote: Hello, I know nothing about compilers and interpreters. I checked several books, but none of them explained why we have to translate a high-level language into a small (core) language. Is it impossible (very hard) to directly translate high-level lang

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers: Why do we need a core language?

On 23/11/2012 9:59 AM, Mike Meyer wrote: [...] I have to ask if your core language for Maple was larger than Maple? Yes. Maple 10 had 62 cases in its AST, we had 75 (p.13 of [1]) Jacques [1] http://www.cas.mcmaster.ca/~carette/publications/scp_MaplePE.pdf ___

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers: Why do we need a core language?

On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 9:59 AM, Mike Meyer wrote: > I have to ask if your core language for Maple was larger than Maple? I can think of several reasons why it would make sense, especially if the core language is much harder for a human to write for but much easier to optimize and/or generate m

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers: Why do we need a core language?

Jacques Carette wrote: >On 22/11/2012 11:52 AM, Brandon Allbery wrote: >> On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 7:56 AM, Jacques Carette >> > wrote: >> >> On 20/11/2012 6:08 PM, Richard O'Keefe wrote: >> >> On 21/11/2012, at 4:49 AM, >

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers: Why do we need a core language?

On 22/11/2012 7:37 PM, Richard O'Keefe wrote: On 23/11/2012, at 1:56 AM, Jacques Carette wrote: Actually, here I disagree. It might be much 'easier' for the programmers to do it for a small core language, but it may turn out to be much, much less effective. I 'discovered' this when (co-)writi

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers: Why do we need a core language?

On 22/11/2012 11:52 AM, Brandon Allbery wrote: On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 7:56 AM, Jacques Carette > wrote: On 20/11/2012 6:08 PM, Richard O'Keefe wrote: On 21/11/2012, at 4:49 AM, mailto:c...@lavabit.com>> wrote: Well, I don't know. Would it sa

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers: Why do we need a core language?

I believe the question you are asking is why do large software systems need to be designed in terms of levels or some other software engineering construct(s). To manage their complexity as opposed to getting mangled in their complexity. :D -- -- Regards, KC

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers: Why do we need a core language?

On 23/11/2012, at 1:56 AM, Jacques Carette wrote: > On 20/11/2012 6:08 PM, Richard O'Keefe wrote: >> On 21/11/2012, at 4:49 AM, wrote: >> >>> Well, I don't know. Would it save some time? Why bother with a core >>> language? >> For a high level language (and for this purpose, even Fortran 66 c

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers: Why do we need a core language?

On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 7:56 AM, Jacques Carette wrote: > On 20/11/2012 6:08 PM, Richard O'Keefe wrote: > >> On 21/11/2012, at 4:49 AM, wrote: >> >> Well, I don't know. Would it save some time? Why bother with a core >>> language? >>> >> For a high level language (and for this purpose, even Fort

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers: Why do we need a core language?

On 20/11/2012 6:08 PM, Richard O'Keefe wrote: On 21/11/2012, at 4:49 AM, wrote: Well, I don't know. Would it save some time? Why bother with a core language? For a high level language (and for this purpose, even Fortran 66 counts as "high level") you really don't _want_ a direct translation

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers: Why do we need a core language?

On 21/11/2012, at 4:49 AM, wrote: >> What would be the point in doing so? > > Well, I don't know. Would it save some time? Why bother with a core language? For a high level language (and for this purpose, even Fortran 66 counts as "high level") you really don't _want_ a direct translation from

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers: Why do we need a core language?

-- Ian Sturdy sturdy...@mail.wlu.edu From: haskell-cafe-boun...@haskell.org [haskell-cafe-boun...@haskell.org] on behalf of Albert Y. C. Lai [tre...@vex.net] Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2012 12:47 PM To: haskell-cafe@haskell.org Subject: Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers: Why do we need a c

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers: Why do we need a core language?

On 12-11-20 06:54 AM, c...@lavabit.com wrote: I know nothing about compilers and interpreters. I checked several books, but none of them explained why we have to translate a high-level language into a small (core) language. Is it impossible (very hard) to directly translate high-level language i

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers: Why do we need a core language?

> Is it impossible (very hard) to directly translate high-level language into machine code? There's a context to your question I don't understand, so let me ask: Wouldn't it be easier to break a big step into smaller baby steps? And if it's indeed easier why wouldn't you choose that route? -- Ki

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers: Why do we need a core language?

On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 6:54 AM, wrote: > I know nothing about compilers and interpreters. I checked several > books, but none of them explained why we have to translate a > high-level language into a small (core) language. Is it impossible > (very hard) to directly translate high-level language

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers: Why do we need a core language?

Hi, Am Dienstag, den 20.11.2012, 06:54 -0500 schrieb c...@lavabit.com: > I know nothing about compilers and interpreters. I checked several > books, but none of them explained why we have to translate a > high-level language into a small (core) language. Is it impossible > (very hard) to directly

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers: Why do we need a core language?

Le Tue, 20 Nov 2012 10:49:01 -0500 (EST), c...@lavabit.com a écrit : > > What would be the point in doing so? > > Well, I don't know. Would it save some time? Why bother with a core > language? The compilation process might be slightly faster, but I guess it wouldn't be much noticeable. Also I

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers: Why do we need a core language?

> What would be the point in doing so? Well, I don't know. Would it save some time? Why bother with a core language? ___ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers: Why do we need a core language?

Le Tue, 20 Nov 2012 06:54:25 -0500 (EST), c...@lavabit.com a écrit : > Hello, > > I know nothing about compilers and interpreters. I checked several > books, but none of them explained why we have to translate a > high-level language into a small (core) language. Is it impossible > (very hard) to

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers: Why do we need a core language?

Hey, Here are some interesting links you that might help answer your question. http://www.aosabook.org/en/ghc.html http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7NPBrWDzO2A Regards, José On 11/20/2012 12:54 PM, c...@lavabit.com wrote: Hello, I know nothing about compilers and interpreters. I checked severa

[Haskell-cafe] Compilers: Why do we need a core language?

Hello, I know nothing about compilers and interpreters. I checked several books, but none of them explained why we have to translate a high-level language into a small (core) language. Is it impossible (very hard) to directly translate high-level language into machine code? ___

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers

On Sat, Nov 29, 2008 at 8:02 PM, John Meacham wrote: > On Sat, Nov 29, 2008 at 11:41:03PM +0100, Daniel Fischer wrote: >> Great, nothing I don't already have, so download the source tarball, unpack >> and >> ./configure --prefix=$HOME >> checking for a BSD-compatible install... /usr/bin/install -c

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers

John Meacham wrote: I never was opposed to a cabal 'target' for jhc. I have 'make dist' 'make dist-rpm' and hopefully 'make msi' soon, adding a 'make dist-hackage' alongside is not a bad thing, however, it is if it complicates the standard build or comes to dominate development effort or can't be

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers

John Meacham wrote: I never was opposed to a cabal 'target' for jhc. I have 'make dist' 'make dist-rpm' and hopefully 'make msi' soon, adding a 'make dist-hackage' alongside is not a bad thing, however, it is if it complicates the standard build or comes to dominate development effort or can't be

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers

On Mon, Dec 01, 2008 at 01:02:40AM +, Ross Paterson wrote: > I am also willing to remove any release with an unchanged name and > made without the support of the maintainer. You have made clear that > the DrIFT-2.2.3 upload is in that category, so I have now removed it. > Looking through, the

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers

On Sun, Nov 30, 2008 at 08:50:51AM -0800, John Meacham wrote: > And creating a crippled version of something you wrote and passing it > off as the original, in a way that clearly breaks things for other > people definitely is something to get upset about. There was a discussion of this issue on th

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers

john: > On Sat, Nov 29, 2008 at 09:00:48PM -0500, Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH wrote: > > On 2008 Nov 29, at 20:02, John Meacham wrote: > >> Oh golly. I never put DrIFT on cabal, apparently whomever tried to > >> cabalize it didn't include the ghc driver script, and also appeared to > >> just drop the

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers

On Sun, Nov 30, 2008 at 17:45:55 +0100, Daniel Fischer wrote: > I am now a proud owner of darcs-2.1.2, the source distribution built without > problems :), make test said "All tests successful!" three times :D > Sorry to deprive you of the pleasure of helping. :-) > > darcs failed: Can't unde

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers

On Sat, Nov 29, 2008 at 09:00:48PM -0500, Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH wrote: > On 2008 Nov 29, at 20:02, John Meacham wrote: >> Oh golly. I never put DrIFT on cabal, apparently whomever tried to >> cabalize it didn't include the ghc driver script, and also appeared to >> just drop the documentation fr

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers

On Sat, Nov 29, 2008 at 05:10:24PM -0800, Don Stewart wrote: > > Oh golly. I never put DrIFT on cabal, apparently whomever tried to > > cabalize it didn't include the ghc driver script, and also appeared to > > just drop the documentation from the package altogether. It is things > > like that that

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers

Am Sonntag, 30. November 2008 15:57 schrieb Eric Kow: > Hi Daniel, > > On Sun, Nov 30, 2008 at 08:31:15 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/lhc> darcs get --partial http://code.haskell.org/lhc > > Invalid repository: http://code.haskell.org/lhc > > > > darcs failed: failed to

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers

Hi Daniel, On Sun, Nov 30, 2008 at 08:31:15 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/lhc> darcs get --partial http://code.haskell.org/lhc > Invalid repository: http://code.haskell.org/lhc > > darcs failed: failed to fetch: http://code.haskell.org/lhc/_darcs/inventory > ExitFailure

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers

On 2008 Nov 29, at 20:02, John Meacham wrote: Oh golly. I never put DrIFT on cabal, apparently whomever tried to cabalize it didn't include the ghc driver script, and also appeared to just drop the documentation from the package altogether. It is things like that that make it very hard to get beh

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers

Am Sonntag, 30. November 2008 00:17 schrieb Austin Seipp: > > If you would be so kind as to try the latest lhc instead by running: > > $ cabal install lhc-0.6.20081127 > > And reporting back, I would like to hear the results and if it went > well. :) Got and installed a lot of dependencies and the

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers

john: > On Sat, Nov 29, 2008 at 11:41:03PM +0100, Daniel Fischer wrote: > > Great, nothing I don't already have, so download the source tarball, unpack > > and > > ./configure --prefix=$HOME > > checking for a BSD-compatible install... /usr/bin/install -c > > checking whether build environment is

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers

On Sat, Nov 29, 2008 at 11:41:03PM +0100, Daniel Fischer wrote: > Great, nothing I don't already have, so download the source tarball, unpack > and > ./configure --prefix=$HOME > checking for a BSD-compatible install... /usr/bin/install -c > checking whether build environment is sane... yes > ...

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers

bulat.ziganshin: > Hello Daniel, > > Sunday, November 30, 2008, 1:41:03 AM, you wrote: > > > Yes, that's very nice to be able to just type > > $ cabal update > > $ cabal install whatever > > and cabal automatically takes care of dependencies (unfortunately only > > Haskell > > i have to mention

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers

Hi Daniel, > 1. cabal install lhc > 20 minutes later I have an lhc executable installed (and the graphviz > package), great, can't be any simpler. Awesome! Glad it worked for you. A tidbit: unfortunately, due to a mistake in the first upload of lhc, you will need to provide an exact version if

Re[2]: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers

Hello Daniel, Sunday, November 30, 2008, 1:41:03 AM, you wrote: > Yes, that's very nice to be able to just type > $ cabal update > $ cabal install whatever > and cabal automatically takes care of dependencies (unfortunately only Haskell i have to mention that there are no haskell compilers that

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers

Am Samstag, 29. November 2008 11:41 schrieb John Meacham: > On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 07:41:42PM -0800, Don Stewart wrote: > > john: > > > On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 07:20:12PM -0800, Jason Dagit wrote: > > > > I spoke with the author of the fork a bit in IRC around the time it > > > > happened and my u

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers

duncan.coutts: > > It is important to me that jhc be as widely accessible at possible. The > > number of machines './configure && make install' will work on outnumbers > > those that cabal install will work on hundreds or thousands to > > one. > > I've sometimes wondered why nobody has made a gene

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers

On Fri, 2008-11-28 at 19:30 -0800, John Meacham wrote: > On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 07:20:12PM -0800, Jason Dagit wrote: > > I spoke with the author of the fork a bit in IRC around the time it happened > > and my understanding is that: > > 1) John sternly objects to using cabal as the build system for

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers

On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 08:51:45PM -0800, Jason Dagit wrote: > On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 7:30 PM, John Meacham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > It is important to me that jhc be as widely accessible at possible. The > > number of machines './configure && make install' will work on outnumbers > > those

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers

On Sat, Nov 29, 2008 at 2:41 AM, John Meacham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 07:41:42PM -0800, Don Stewart wrote: > > john: > > > On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 07:20:12PM -0800, Jason Dagit wrote: > > > > I spoke with the author of the fork a bit in IRC around the time it > happene

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers

On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 07:41:42PM -0800, Don Stewart wrote: > john: > > On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 07:20:12PM -0800, Jason Dagit wrote: > > > I spoke with the author of the fork a bit in IRC around the time it > > > happened > > > and my understanding is that: > > > 1) John sternly objects to using

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers

On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 7:30 PM, John Meacham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 07:20:12PM -0800, Jason Dagit wrote: > > I spoke with the author of the fork a bit in IRC around the time it > happened > > and my understanding is that: > > 1) John sternly objects to using cabal as

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers

john: > On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 07:20:12PM -0800, Jason Dagit wrote: > > I spoke with the author of the fork a bit in IRC around the time it happened > > and my understanding is that: > > 1) John sternly objects to using cabal as the build system for JHC > > This is a fairly silly reason to fork a

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers

On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 07:20:12PM -0800, Jason Dagit wrote: > I spoke with the author of the fork a bit in IRC around the time it happened > and my understanding is that: > 1) John sternly objects to using cabal as the build system for JHC This is a fairly silly reason to fork a project, especial

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers

Am 27.11.2008 um 09:23 schrieb Don Stewart: allbery: On 2008 Nov 26, at 16:58, Matthias Kilian wrote: On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 09:35:01PM +, Andrew Coppin wrote: It is a fork of the JHC compiler, which should be easier to look up. There is also Hugs, as you mentioned. In addition, you m

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers

allbery: > On 2008 Nov 26, at 16:58, Matthias Kilian wrote: > >On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 09:35:01PM +, Andrew Coppin wrote: > >>>It is a fork of the JHC compiler, which should be easier to look up. > >>>There is also Hugs, as you mentioned. In addition, you may want to > >>>look at YHC and NHC. >

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers

On 2008 Nov 26, at 16:58, Matthias Kilian wrote: On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 09:35:01PM +, Andrew Coppin wrote: It is a fork of the JHC compiler, which should be easier to look up. There is also Hugs, as you mentioned. In addition, you may want to look at YHC and NHC. Yeah, the "implementation

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers

On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 6:19 PM, Richard O'Keefe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 27 Nov 2008, at 10:56 am, Andrew Coppin wrote: > >> Donnie Jones wrote: >> >>> Here is the current homepage for the LHC project: >>> http://lhc.seize.it/ >>> Yes. I found that - it just didn't *say* very much. ;-)

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers

On 27 Nov 2008, at 10:56 am, Andrew Coppin wrote: Donnie Jones wrote: Here is the current homepage for the LHC project: http://lhc.seize.it/ Yes. I found that - it just didn't *say* very much. ;-) I really really wish there were just one more sentence on that page saying WHY there is a fork

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers

On 27/11/2008, at 8:35 AM, Andrew Coppin wrote: Jake McArthur wrote: Andrew Coppin wrote: Don Stewart wrote: Noteworthy, * lhc-20081121: “Lhc Haskell Compiler” Interesting. I can't find out any information about this... It is a fork of the JHC compiler, which should be eas

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers

On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 11:14 PM, David Menendez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > How old is nhc? I've always thought of it as one of the "big three", > but I don't really know how far back it goes compared to ghc. > The following page suggests that it was released mid 1994 but there could of course ha

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers

On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 4:58 PM, Matthias Kilian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 09:35:01PM +, Andrew Coppin wrote: >> >It is a fork of the JHC compiler, which should be easier to look up. >> >There is also Hugs, as you mentioned. In addition, you may want to >> >look at YH

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers

On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 09:35:01PM +, Andrew Coppin wrote: > >It is a fork of the JHC compiler, which should be easier to look up. > >There is also Hugs, as you mentioned. In addition, you may want to > >look at YHC and NHC. > > Yeah, the "implementations" page on the Wiki basically says tha

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers

On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 03:29:43PM -0600, Jake McArthur wrote: >> Interesting. I can't find out any information about this... > > It is a fork of the JHC compiler, which should be easier to look up. > There is also Hugs, as you mentioned. In addition, you may want to look > at YHC and NHC. Hmm

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers

Donnie Jones wrote: Here is the current homepage for the LHC project: http://lhc.seize.it/ Hope that helps. Yes. I found that - it just didn't *say* very much. ;-) I guess like many small projects, they're too busy *doing* it to have time to document it.

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers

Jake McArthur wrote: Andrew Coppin wrote: Don Stewart wrote: Noteworthy, * lhc-20081121: “Lhc Haskell Compiler” Interesting. I can't find out any information about this... It is a fork of the JHC compiler, which should be easier to look up. There is also Hugs, as you ment

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers

Hello Andrew, On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 4:24 PM, Andrew Coppin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > Don Stewart wrote: > >> Noteworthy, >> * lhc-20081121: "Lhc Haskell Compiler" >> >> > > Interesting. I can't find out any information about this... > > Here is the current homepage for the LHC pr

Re: [Haskell-cafe] Compilers

Andrew Coppin wrote: Don Stewart wrote: Noteworthy, * lhc-20081121: “Lhc Haskell Compiler” Interesting. I can't find out any information about this... It is a fork of the JHC compiler, which should be easier to look up. There is also Hugs, as you mentioned. In addition, yo

[Haskell-cafe] Compilers

Don Stewart wrote: Noteworthy, * lhc-20081121: “Lhc Haskell Compiler” Interesting. I can't find out any information about this... From time to time you do hear about Haskell compilers that aren't GHC, but I'm not aware of any other compilers that are production-grade yet.