Version française
Home     About     Download     Resources     Contact us    
Browse thread
OCamlJIT2 vs. OCamlJIT
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: -- (:)
From: Richard Jones <rich@a...>
Subject: Re: ocamlopt LLVM support (Was: [Caml-list] OCamlJIT2 vs. OCamlJIT)
On Sun, Dec 05, 2010 at 05:37:32PM +0100, Benedikt Meurer wrote:
> 1. You will have to rewrite not only the compiler, the standard
> library and the bytecode interpreter (already a massive amount of
> work), but you also loose compatibility with almost every existing
> OCaml library binding, since the native function interface will be
> different. That's a hell of a lot of work for many people.

It might kick-start efforts to automatically generate bindings, at
least to C code, which wouldn't be a bad thing.  camlidl is clumsy and
doesn't handle a very important case (pointers to handles) so it's not
really useful for this.

I do agree with the rest of your points though, and it's good to have
intelligent discussion of the real issues at long last.

Rich.

-- 
Richard Jones
Red Hat