Version française
Home     About     Download     Resources     Contact us    

This site is updated infrequently. For up-to-date information, please visit the new OCaml website at

Browse thread
Re: [Caml-list] The DLL-hell of O'Caml
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: -- (:)
From: Jeff Henrikson <jehenrik@y...>
Subject: RE: [Caml-list] The DLL-hell of O'Caml
> In O'Caml replacing library X by a newer version usually means that
> all libraries Y that depend on X must be recompiled. And there is no
> guarantee that Y can be compiled at all. I do not see any chance to
> change this, it is a consequence of strict typing.

I don't see this.  I can believe that consequences of implementation choices which have been made prohibit this.  For hypothetical
example, inlining behavior which could not be disabled on public interfaces would be a problem.  (I don't think this particular
thing happens in ocaml.)  But I certainly don't see "a consequence of strict typing."  Can you give a specific example?

Jeff Henrikson

To unsubscribe, mail Archives:
Bug reports: FAQ:
Beginner's list: