> So does that mean fixing up GHC's architecture so that it can be built with
> support for more than 1 target? (or at least running libs on *host* in GHCI
> but otherwise compiling them for target? )
> What would be needed in the restricted case of "We just want TH for our
> cross compiler" rather than "general multi target goodness"?
> Because If I squint, it sort of sounds like the cross compiler would need
> to be Stage 2, and that the UNsound but simplest approach would then be to
> take the various "libways", and produce both host and target variants as
> appropriate (or that "build HOST Way" has to explicitly flagged). I"m not
> sure what implications this or another approach would have on all the
> various build tooling needed etc etc.
> This is me just thinking out loud / trying to understand *why* and whats
> needed, and how complex the work would be to do it well, or at least
> decently in a way that *improves* (or doesn't complicate much more) the
> associated parts that would need to be fixed up.
> Basically: whats needed to make cross compiler GHC first class haskell wrt
> TH support? (I imagine that its not worth working on till the new TH work
> lands / stabilizes, but id like to understand what work has to be done to
> lead up to it).
> (if I can figure out ways I can directly or indirectly support such work
> happening, subject to having the time and/or resources over the next year,
> i'd like to try and do so)
> On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 8:28 PM, Manuel M T Chakravarty <
> chak at cse.unsw.edu.au> wrote:
>> As you can imagine, I would be extremely happy about cross-compilation
>> support for TH. However, I don't know of anybody working on it at the
>> moment, unfortunately.
>> Carter Schonwald <carter.schonwald at gmail.com>:
>> > Hey All,
>> > Whats the story planned for template haskell + cross compiler support
>> come ghc 7.8?
>> > I understand theres a lot of Template Haskell design underway, some of
>> which will help support tools like Manuel's Inline-Objective-C work. Does
>> this mean that factored out within this reorganization is a better story
>> for cross compilation?
>> > Especially since one kill "app" for the Inline-Objective-C template
>> haskell work would be writing IOS applications. Though I guess that also
>> touches on the need to sort out supporting "FAT" ARM binaries too, right?
>> > This intersects with a few different large subsets of tickets, so i'm
>> not sure if any single ticket is the right fora for this question.
>> > thanks!
>> > -Carter
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > ghc-devs mailing list
>> > ghc-devs at haskell.org
>> > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs >>