From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id WAA00168; Sun, 30 Mar 2003 22:28:25 +0200 (MET DST) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id WAA00446 for ; Sun, 30 Mar 2003 22:28:23 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from wetware.wetware.com (wetware.wetware.com [199.108.16.1]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id h2UKS8X04295 for ; Sun, 30 Mar 2003 22:28:22 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from wetware.com([208.177.152.16]) (2808 bytes) by wetware.wetware.com via sendmail with P:esmtp/R:bind_hosts/T:inet_zone_bind_smtp (sender: ) id for ; Sun, 30 Mar 2003 12:27:25 -0800 (PST) (Smail-3.2.0.114 2001-Aug-6 #1 built 2002-Sep-2) Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2003 12:27:26 -0800 Subject: Re: [Caml-list] VxWorks? mailing list? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v551) From: james woodyatt To: The Trade Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <20030330122643.D22539@pauillac.inria.fr> Message-Id: <05455F12-62EE-11D7-8E0A-000393BA7EBA@wetware.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.551) X-Spam: no; 0.00; woodyatt:01 jhw:01 wetware:01 caml-list:01 posix:01 non-trivial:01 bin:01 compiler:01 kernel:01 ocaml:01 bytecode:01 supported:01 trivial:01 native-code:02 compile:02 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk On Sunday, Mar 30, 2003, at 02:26 US/Pacific, Xavier Leroy wrote: > [Someone else asked] >> Has anyone heard of running OCaml programs under the VxWorks real-time >> OS from WindRiver? People who build actual products are asking me if >> my OCaml code can run under VxWorks and I'd appreciate hearing about >> any experiences others have had with either compiling the byte-code >> interpreter or getting native code to work for any of the VxWorks >> targets. Wouldn't it be nice if we could point to OCaml code in >> everyday office products? > > I have no experience with VxWorks, but from their Web site it appears > to be POSIX-compliant. If so, chances are very high that the bytecode > interpreter will compile and work right out of the box. For the > native-code compiler, the porting effort can range from the trivial > (e.g. one of the supported configurations just happens to work) to the > fairly hard (e.g. a new code generator has to be written). It's not > possible to say without more details on the target platform and > environment. I have experience with VxWorks. Its "POSIX compliance" is narrow. Code is generally cross-compiled and deployment is much more like loading a module into a dynamic kernel rather than launching a POSIX process. I would expect that some non-trivial labor would be involved in porting the build process for the byte-code interpreter to make it live with the VxWorks cross-development tools in $WIND_BASE/host/$arch/bin. Then there would likely be a collection of issues revolving around symbol conflicts, i.e. things defined in the byte-code interpreter that are provided by VxWorks-- or by whatever other Wind River platform packages you're using. There would finally be issues associated with making the VxWorks IPC mechanisms available to OCaml programs. The native-code compiler could also be a major additional headache if the CPU of your target is something weird, like say an ARM processor. I like OCaml, but I suspect that Lua might be a better choice for bringing functional programming to the embedded application world. It would probably be a lot easier to get Lua up and running under VxWorks. -- j h woodyatt ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners