English version
Accueil     Ŕ propos     Téléchargement     Ressources     Contactez-nous    

Ce site est rarement mis ŕ jour. Pour les informations les plus récentes, rendez-vous sur le nouveau site OCaml ŕ l'adresse ocaml.org.

Browse thread
Why don't use batteries
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: 2009-09-07 (14:42)
From: Dmitry Bely <dmitry.bely@g...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Why don't use batteries
On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 11:35 AM, David
Rajchenbach-Teller<David.Teller@ens-lyon.org> wrote:
> I take it to be a complaint against Batteries in particular
> (helloworld.native is several Mb, when linked statically) and agains the
> compiler in particular (in any given program, most of this is dead code
> which the compiler fails to remove).
> Xavier Leroy is aware of the issue. Maybe either he or Xavier Clerc will
> be able to look at it someday.

Returning to an old discussion


I don't think it can be (and will be) done. We should live with these
big executables with considerable amount of dead code.

> Cheers,
>  David
> On Fri, 2009-09-04 at 15:00 +0100, Richard Jones wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 04, 2009 at 02:49:52PM +0200, Julien Signoles wrote:
>> > 3) It makes my executables too big
>> > Yes, even if it seems to be improved in a close future.
>> Is this a complaint against Batteries in particular or OCaml in
>> general?  OCaml binaries in general are rather large, and it appears
>> to be because the runtime / GC is statically linked.  Do you know how
>> much this would improve with dynamic linking of libasmrun.a (which
>> IIRC was a feature added in 3.11)?
>> Rich.

- Dmitry Bely