From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <whitequark@whitequark.org>
X-Original-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr
Delivered-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr
Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104])
	by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 11D607EE25
	for <caml-list@sympa.inria.fr>; Fri,  8 Nov 2013 11:18:43 +0100 (CET)
Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  whitequark@whitequark.org) identity=pra;
  client-ip=176.58.103.125;
  receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="whitequark@whitequark.org";
  x-sender="whitequark@whitequark.org";
  x-conformance=sidf_compatible
Received-SPF: Pass (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: domain of
  whitequark@whitequark.org designates 176.58.103.125 as
  permitted sender) identity=mailfrom;
  client-ip=176.58.103.125;
  receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="whitequark@whitequark.org";
  x-sender="whitequark@whitequark.org";
  x-conformance=sidf_compatible; x-record-type="v=spf1"
Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  postmaster@mail.whitequark.org) identity=helo;
  client-ip=176.58.103.125;
  receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="whitequark@whitequark.org";
  x-sender="postmaster@mail.whitequark.org";
  x-conformance=sidf_compatible
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AqILAC+6fFKwOmd9/2dsb2JhbABahjJUhkeyXoJ5gUF0giYBBSMPAQVBEAQFAhoCJgICLCsGG4d9jmGbXpJRgSmIEYYtBxaCVYFFA4k8oF6DKzc
X-IPAS-Result: AqILAC+6fFKwOmd9/2dsb2JhbABahjJUhkeyXoJ5gUF0giYBBSMPAQVBEAQFAhoCJgICLCsGG4d9jmGbXpJRgSmIEYYtBxaCVYFFA4k8oF6DKzc
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.93,658,1378850400"; 
   d="scan'208";a="34414326"
Received: from fehu.whitequark.org (HELO mail.whitequark.org) ([176.58.103.125])
  by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 08 Nov 2013 11:18:42 +0100
Received: by mail.whitequark.org (Postfix, from userid 33)
	id 454964D715; Fri,  8 Nov 2013 14:18:40 +0400 (MSK)
To: <jon@ffconsultancy.com>
X-PHP-Originating-Script: 1000:main.inc
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8;
 format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2013 14:18:40 +0400
From: Peter Zotov <whitequark@whitequark.org>
Cc: <caml-list@inria.fr>
In-Reply-To: <010801cedc66$0425bcc0$0c713640$@ffconsultancy.com>
References: <d7f9f3fb65cc0c93ba87569464c80910@whitequark.org>
 <010801cedc66$0425bcc0$0c713640$@ffconsultancy.com>
Message-ID: <14f25a35d63f2b6ce6185d86dc66d2bd@whitequark.org>
X-Sender: whitequark@whitequark.org
User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/0.8.6
Subject: RE: [Caml-list] LLVM OCaml bindings

Jon Harrop писал 08.11.2013 13:36:
> I just wanted to check: you're not breaking the existing bindings, 
> right?

Sorry, realized the previous letter was phrased ambiguously.
I'm asking because I do want to break existing bindings. The changes 
would
mainly touch two areas:
1) Memory management. I want to get rid of most or all of dispose 
functions
and allow to use OCaml's GC.
2) Llvm_target interface is very outdated and it could be updated to 
integrate
much better with the TargetMachine interface.

There are also two or three Llvm functions which need minor changes.

I'm not going to change APIs in any way which needs nontrivial, 
significant
fixes to clients, there's simply no need.

-- 
   WBR, Peter Zotov.