On May 20, 2004, at 2:04 PM, Jon Harrop wrote:

> On Thursday 20 May 2004 21:30, Eric Stokes wrote:
>> ...
>> No, that is the case with dynamic linking, not static linking. The 
>> only
>> issue with
>> static linking and commercial stuff is that your patches are likely to
>> be much bigger.
>> However the good thing about it is that your code is fairly immune to
>> dynamic library
>> changes on the client machine.
>
> Would my users not keep getting unavoidable "The files blah.cmi and 
> mylib.cmi
> make inconsistent assumptions over interface Blah"?
>

If it is a library that you maintain you would need to send a new .cmi 
file with each
new version of the library. But an application linked to your library 
would not be effected
by this change in any way unless the application writer recompiled the 
application against
the new version of the library. There is no link phase (except linking 
to external c libraries)
at the start of an Ocaml program. The application binary contains a 
copy of all the Ocaml code
ever used by the program, including library code.

> Cheers,
> Jon.
>
> -------------------
> 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
>

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