[haskell-llvm] llvm-general FFI dependencies

[Dr. Benjamin S. Scarlet]

Scott,

You asked on IRC about putting the Transforms into the -ffi package. I
replied that yes, that option would be weird.

This option of putting them into the -pure package is also weird.

I'm torn between the two. Neither one is unacceptable; neither is
particularly nice.

I'm pondering the two, and would welcome arguments in either direction.

-Ben Scarlet

On Mon, 2013-08-19 at 09:33 +0200, Scott West wrote:
> Hello all,
> 
> I've been looking a bit in the past week at the llvm-general bindings
> trying to figure out how to tweeze the FFI part away from the rest.
> 
> As Ben Scarlet indicated, the dependency of the FFI part is largely on
> llvm-general-pure. However, there are two other small dependencies on
> the llvm-general:
> 
> - LLVM.General.Internal.InstructionDefs and
> - LLVM.General.Transforms
> 
> It seems that the dependency on Internal.InstructionDefs is mostly just
> code-sharing, and there is probably a not too difficult solution there.
> 
> For Transforms however, I'm less sure what to do.
> 
> I think a better option is to move it into llvm-general-pure, as it
> certainly pure, although it's not really part of the AST (which
> llvm-general-pure mostly contains). This would make it that
> llvm-general-pure is a dependency for all llvm packages in the future,
> allowing us to share a single FFI implementation (the currently hidden
> llvm-general one).
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Regards,
> Scott
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Haskell-llvm mailing list
> Haskell-llvm at projects.haskell.org
> http://projects.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-llvm