Re: [Caml-list] OCaml standard library improvement

[Brian Hurt <brian.hurt@qlogic.com>]

On Fri, 21 Feb 2003, Nicolas George wrote:

> 
> I think you misunderstoud the problem I was mentionning. A string
> library should be one module, we agree. Let's say it is "String". Then
> as soon as you use one function of the String module, the resulting
> binary will hold _all_ the code in the String module. If you have a lot
> of functions in the module (and this is what we want), you have a huge
> binary. Berk.
> 
> As far as I know, there is no hack to avoid it. It would be necessary to
> rethink the format of the .cmo or .cma files to allow that.
> 

A worry that never even crossed my mind :-).

The proper solution for this, IMHO, is shared libraries.  Yeah, the 
library is huge, but there is only one copy of it for everyone.

But I'm inclined to cross that bridge when we come to it.  I'm much more 
concerned that the library won't get used because it's "inconvient".

I say, let's start gathering code, then worry about how to package it.

Brian

-------------------
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