[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: address@hidden: dynamic loading of native code modules]

From: Lynn Winebarger
Subject: Re: address@hidden: dynamic loading of native code modules]
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 21:33:14 -0500

On Monday 29 April 2002 20:35, Thien-Thi Nguyen wrote:
>    From: Lynn Winebarger <address@hidden>
>    Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 19:26:19 -0500
>       This is an interesting policy.  Is it documented somewhere?  I
>    take it the reason is because it's easier to develop the C libraries
>    that way.
> dude, you buzzkill cuz-we-can (bfd).
      I don't know how to take this.
> what makes C libraries easy to develop and install?

      Being easily integrated with C programs is Guile's raison d'etre
(or it was originally, anyway).  Producing multiple libraries or putting
constraints on the format/contents of the library would impose more
work, and hence less ease, on the integrator. That's just my guess,
     It's not immediately clear to me what a better format would be
without a guile-specific compiler/linker/loader  (a scheme compiler
shouldn't have to comply with C ABI requirements except where it, uh,
has to).
     Anyway, I don't have any immediate complaint about the policy,
just think it's useful to know.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]