]> Hello, On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 07:09:16PM +0000, Gilles Pirio wrote: > Greetings all.. > > Following up on an idea explored few weeks ago, I've now implemented the > dynamic back-end mechanism on ocamlopt. > > What would be the way to go for ocamlopt.opt? I don't think we want to have > this dynamic back-end thingie with opt.opt as native dynlink isn't supported on > all platforms. My approach at the momemt is to have different files for the > back-end loader (depending on whether it is an opt or opt.opt build). So the > makefile is a bit messier than before. Would that be ok anyway, any better way > to do that that I'm not aware of? If this is fine, I'll submit my patch. > You can play a little bit with camlp4 and pa_macro to disable certain part of your opt.opt (like replacing dynlink call by nothing/empty list...). I think you can try doing this kind of conditional compilation well enough if your changes are located in an almost central place > On Tue, Dec 9, 2008 at 7:31 PM, Sylvain Le Gall <sylvain@le-gall.net> wrote: > > On 09-12-2008, Gilles Pirio <gilles.pirio@gmail.com> wrote: > >> To my mind, the best way is to provide a patch through the bug tracking > >> system of INRIA. This is highly probable that INRIA team doesn't accept > >> it directly but ask you to justify/modify it in order to fit the whole > >> compiler -- which could be quiet a long process in fact. > > > > It would greatly help to know what the INRIA team would consider as > > acceptable ahead of doing the work. What kind of guidlines would you > > advise me to follow? I guess I can add new passes but can I modify > > existing ones? > > > > The ideal solution would be to open the back-end using the dynlink > > library. I've done it with 3.11 to speed up development. The back-end is > now > > a cmo file. I separately compile copt0.cmo, copt1.cmo... with different > > back-ends. Then I can use command like: ocamlopt -copt copt0.cmo > myfile.ml > > to compile with my back-end. > > But even though that's a small change I'm not sure the INRIA guys would > > like it, right? > > > > > > This idea rocks! The best way is to begin by providing a basic patch and > follow this explanation: > http://et.redhat.com/~rjones/how-to-supply-code-to-open-source-projects/ > (even if it is not said, half of the people involved are OCaml > developers). > > The other idea is that the smallest is the best. That's why your idea > rocks. If the possibility to dynamically load backend is small, it will > be a very good first step. > > When you will have made this first step (that can profit to all), you > can either submit your backend or provide it by any other mean. > > Regards > Sylvain Le Gall > > ps: consider fecthing a copy of the CVS Regards Sylvain Le Gall