On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 06:21:11PM +0000, John J Lee wrote:
> How big is the runtime?  Does the compiler only link in the parts of the
> runtime that you use, or do you just non-negotiably get the whole thing
> every time you link?

It's really not so huge. You'll have to tell us a bit more about your
situation.

As a general guide, I was recently involved in writing a large
simulation program. We distributed two natively compiled OCaml
programs in a Windows installer, plus many auxiliary files, and the
size of the installer came to between 6 and 8 MB. This was not such an
issue for our users. [The installer was written using NSIS and used
bzip2 compression].

> Probably this is a naive question, but: Is it impractical to have a
> functional language that uses the C runtime?

OCaml links (dynamically) with the C runtime as well. ie. libc on Unix.

> Does anyone have recommendations for languages (not necessarily
> functional) with a compiler that generates small executables (including
> runtime code) for multiple platforms (at least Unix and Windows), with a
> decent FFI (foreign function interface), and preferably MS COM support?

Yes, OCaml! If you want COM support, look at OCam'OLE.

> Am I really stuck with C++??

Well, one would hope not. Supply us with more details about exactly
what the limitations are that you're facing, and we'll be able to
provide some more meaningful information.

Rich.

-- 
Richard Jones. http://www.annexia.org/ http://freshmeat.net/users/rwmj
Merjis Ltd. http://www.merjis.com/ - improving website return on investment
"I wish more software used text based configuration files!"
 -- A Windows NT user, quoted on Slashdot.

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