From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.82])
	by walapai.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id pBA9aeSl010787
	for <caml-list@sympa-roc.inria.fr>; Sat, 10 Dec 2011 10:36:40 +0100
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvcAACIn407RVde2kGdsb2JhbABDqnQIIgEBAQEJCQ0HFAQhgXIBAQEDARICJgYBATcBBAsLGBwSNAEFARwGNYdmAph1CoozhBwBjWoHiwpjomY9g3o
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.71,331,1320620400"; 
   d="scan'208";a="134815785"
Received: from mail-ey0-f182.google.com ([209.85.215.182])
  by mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-SHA; 10 Dec 2011 10:36:35 +0100
Received: by eaai12 with SMTP id i12so2926409eaa.27
        for <multiple recipients>; Sat, 10 Dec 2011 01:36:35 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=googlemail.com; s=gamma;
        h=subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc
         :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer;
        bh=6P+az/fjCqW3HVvGqy/OTamyQKGJtAyAUpCuqDqaYOU=;
        b=uH7Ktyxrw41K2l0Ld0P/JHnfh4RZ0UJQgnUXGiorNwuSAcrM6z9PDe8a3ccTYWwfa+
         dVIFeLdlTy/pYk0R0H9g34ecrHaR0GsqoEmRnKgvt9HxKKHM2XFeZu3R5smL4X8n2gI5
         zQWBaTWyIM4cQihjjGk4je1NH7nk3b7Y9jZd0=
Received: by 10.213.21.148 with SMTP id j20mr655453ebb.87.1323509795132;
        Sat, 10 Dec 2011 01:36:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from coruscant.kosmos.all (ip-95-223-170-32.unitymediagroup.de. [95.223.170.32])
        by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 58sm43136831eet.11.2011.12.10.01.36.32
        (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
        Sat, 10 Dec 2011 01:36:33 -0800 (PST)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1251.1)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: Benedikt Meurer <benedikt.meurer@googlemail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20111209212216.GA29092@annexia.org>
Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2011 10:36:32 +0100
Cc: Gabriel Scherer <gabriel.scherer@gmail.com>,
        =?iso-8859-1?Q?St=E9phane_Glondu?= <steph@glondu.net>, oleg@okmij.org,
        caml-list@inria.fr, ontologiae@gmail.com, caml@inria.fr
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <A8C54C1C-00BD-422F-98DC-19445530E45B@googlemail.com>
References: <20111209065758.94306.qmail@eeoth.pair.com> <4EE1BE59.4020804@glondu.net> <CAPFanBEJOtQ5=VD8_-1T2xUPqpL5DvRFX+mtkEPV3LG_hrbUQg@mail.gmail.com> <A46ACDBE-9251-42BB-AC04-86FD5DD8593B@googlemail.com> <CAPFanBH93_q95md6fk5XENV26VfdKv17JwLSZjNwX8oVxAt6Uw@mail.gmail.com> <59A74C55-C12B-4C98-9496-2E83BE8A39F0@googlemail.com> <20111209212216.GA29092@annexia.org>
To: "Richard W.M. Jones" <rich@annexia.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1251.1)
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Why NOT to compile OCaml via C


On Dec 9, 2011, at 22:22 , Richard W.M. Jones wrote:

> On Fri, Dec 09, 2011 at 03:05:43PM +0100, Benedikt Meurer wrote:
>> Hm, I'm not sure. It's really easy to generate LLVM code for OCaml
>> in general, the problem is getting things to interact with legacy
>> OCaml code, with exception handling being one of the most important
>> issue.
> 
> As Edwin said, I don't think interaction with existing ocamlopt-
> compiled code is that important.  Debian and Fedora routinely
> "recompile the world".  What is more important is compatibility with C
> extensions.  How difficult is just C extension compatibility?  Or
> something that was mostly compatible but needed a few changes to C
> extensions?

It should work in general.

> Rich.

Benedikt