Re: Pre-compiled ocaml binary for windows

[Sylvain Le Gall <sylvain@le-gall.net>]

On 07-12-2010, Alain Frisch <alain@frisch.fr> wrote:
> On 12/07/2010 10:03 AM, Sylvain Le Gall wrote:
>> We will provide ocamlopt (32/64 bits). But indeed, the toolchain can be
>> an issue (esp. masm). I plan to use VS2008.
>
> I don't think MASM is going to be an issue. FWIW, the Windows 7 SDK 
> (which has nothing to do with Windows 7) contains everything needed 
> (including the VS2008 C compiler, the assembler, the linker, the 
> libraries, etc).
>

Probably a good item for documentation/installation screen/link on the
future website of ocaml-installer.

>> Maybe the native Lexifi's amd64/x86 backend is a better option. If we
>> are able to use this backend, we still have to use a linker ?
>
> This native backend removes the need for an external assembler for using 
> ocamlopt. Flexdll has a standalone mode to build DLLs which works fine 
> to build pure OCaml .cmxs plugins for ocamlopt (there might be some 
> issues when linking C libraries in the cmxs). But yes, to build the main 
> program, you still need an external linker (this could be addressed by 
> working more on flexdll) and also static runtime objects and libraries.
>
> An option could be to ship a minimalistic main program, which simply 
> dynlinks .cmxs files given on its command line.
>

You mean like ld.ocaml:
https://forge.ocamlcore.org/projects/ld-ocaml/

>>> Not building labltk seems ok. As for the graphical toplevel, I think
>>> there are some pending bugs (random crashes) with the current version
>>> under recent versions of Windows, so it's probably better not to include
>>> it. Some support for installing the emacs mode automatically and/or a
>>> version of ledit would be useful replacements.
>>>
>>
>> I didn't known this fact. This is another reason for not building
>> labltk. Since I almost never use it, I don't think it will be a big
>> loose.
>
> The graphical toplevel does not depend on labltk, so the two issues are 
> really unrelated.  For crashes with the OCamlWin.exe, I was thinking 
> about http://caml.inria.fr/mantis/view.php?id=4399 and 
> http://caml.inria.fr/mantis/view.php?id=3052, but this might be pure 
> FUD. The real problem is that nobody seems interested enough in this 
> graphical toplevel to put serious work on it.
>

Thanks for the clarification. I didn't made a clear answer, but I know
that labltk and OCamlWin are 2 separate things. 

>
>> I will probably look for ledit (or lwt toplevel) which seems a better
>> alternative to emacs (too heavy too install).
>
> If your hope is to make OCaml accessible to beginner hobbyists under 
> Windows (I assume this is the primary audience for pre-compiled 
> binaries), you might still want to provide easy ways to use code 
> editors. Providing easy access only to the toplevel (be it graphical, or 
> with a line-editor) might be a turnoff for beginners.
>

You are right, in this case I will probably take into consideration this
project:
http://ocamleditor.forge.ocamlcore.org/

It has started on Windows ;-)

Regards,
Sylvain Le Gall