From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BC76BB9A for ; Sun, 30 Oct 2005 02:45:18 +0200 (CEST) Received: from wproxy.gmail.com (wproxy.gmail.com [64.233.184.198]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id j9U0jHnU011284 for ; Sun, 30 Oct 2005 02:45:18 +0200 Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id i7so350620wra for ; Sat, 29 Oct 2005 17:45:17 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=sH9sXW/RNaSHFjzANKQUf6XhnFL/MxpGV3uYanvpvke5psFa1Yb5TqnfhV1bulAGrrDQYa7R+4UF8GALh6Vird4rsDMUV/anBpAHd80g7QdaxfzeIlV3xdS/XSL2ilgxHrOs5631yiHVPvvKE94t/yOeEbbFbDVfv1jjZBJOMPQ= Received: by 10.64.210.16 with SMTP id i16mr472397qbg; Sat, 29 Oct 2005 17:45:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.65.23.20 with HTTP; Sat, 29 Oct 2005 17:45:17 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2005 13:45:17 +1300 From: Jonathan Roewen To: Gerd Stolpmann Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Changing implementations of standard libraries... Cc: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr In-Reply-To: <1130585800.15589.131.camel@localhost.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline References: <1130585800.15589.131.camel@localhost.localdomain> X-Miltered: at nez-perce with ID 4364179D.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 compiler:01 afaik:01 stdlib:01 -nostdlib:01 o'caml:01 binary:01 cmi:01 cmo:01 ocaml:01 lib:01 ...:98 somewhere:02 external:02 external:02 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.3 (2005-04-27) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_BY_IP autolearn=disabled version=3.0.3 > > What changes does -vmthread make to the compiler when generating code? > > AFAIK, the generated code is the same. It must change -something- somewhere, else what's the point of it? > A different version of the stdlib is linked. Okay, I can understand that. Would the effect be the same as -nostdlib and -nopervasives, and providing own includes & implementations? What effect does -nopervasives have? Can I still provide my own implementation? What's the way to go here? > Yes. But you cannot implement in O'Caml when the function is external > because this is part of the interface, at least if you need binary > compatibility. Yes, but in most cases, the external keyword can be hidden from the .cmi, and only specified in .ml/.cmo -- I see examples of this in OCaml standard lib, and do this myself in most cases. Jonathan