... | ... | @@ -18,8 +18,7 @@ There are several reasons for wanting to do this: |
|
|
|
|
|
- We can have **stack traces in interpreted code** (#11047), without the compiler itself having to be profiled.
|
|
|
|
|
|
- It separates the decision about whether to use the dynamic linker for interpreted code from whether GHC itself must be dynamically linked. We could **go back to a statically-linked GHC, which should be faster.
|
|
|
**
|
|
|
- It separates the decision about whether to use the dynamic linker for interpreted code from whether GHC itself must be dynamically linked. We could **go back to a statically-linked GHC, which should be faster.**
|
|
|
|
|
|
- We could **use dynamic linking in GHCi on Windows**, which was previously blocked because GHC itself is too big to make into a dynamic library. (whether this is a good idea or not is debatable, but at least it's technically possible now)
|
|
|
|
... | ... | |