# Single-compiler vs. multi-compilers (or. implementation-defined vs. standardized) languages

**URL:** <https://discourse.haskell.org/t/single-compiler-vs-multi-compilers-or-implementation-defined-vs-standardized-languages/5209>\
**Category:** Uncategorized\
**Created:** [October 23, 2022, 6:28am UTC](https://discourse.haskell.org/t/single-compiler-vs-multi-compilers-or-implementation-defined-vs-standardized-languages/5209 "2022-10-23T06:28:11Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 21

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![atravers](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/45deac/32.png) [@atravers](https://discourse.haskell.org/u/atravers)\
**Post date:** [October 26, 2022, 5:45pm UTC](https://discourse.haskell.org/t/single-compiler-vs-multi-compilers-or-implementation-defined-vs-standardized-languages/5209/21 "2022-10-26T17:45:35Z")

</div>

> [@A tick-tock release cycle for GHC](http://discourse.haskell.org/t/a-tick-tock-release-cycle-for-ghc/4601/2):
>
> Since I can’t be bothered with setting up yet another “git-house” account - the [suggestion](https://github.com/haskellfoundation/tech-proposals/pull/34#issuecomment-1140226643) by @santiweight: Another point to make is that the naming scheme is here is imo quite poor. Intuitively, 9.0 would appear to be a long-term support release since it is [a] major version bump. […] is quite reasonable: ghc-v.0.n (for largest n) - the most recent maintenance-only version which provides relative stability; ghc-v.k.m (for k \> 0) - for adding and testing language and other extensions; ghc-…

---

_[View the full topic](https://discourse.haskell.org/t/single-compiler-vs-multi-compilers-or-implementation-defined-vs-standardized-languages/5209)._