[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Chicken-users] CVS update

From: Sven Hartrumpf
Subject: Re: [Chicken-users] CVS update
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 23:22:40 +0100 (CET)

On 20 Jan 2003, felix <address@hidden> wrote: 
> One question: when the compiler compiles scripts (with a she-bang
> header-line) should it automatically declare all library units as
> used, which are normally provided by the interpreter? Otherwise
> one would have to add `(declare (uses ...))' or `require'. Letting
> the compiler do this, would make things a bit more transparent.

> On the other hand, we might not need all those libs.

Yes, there are always cases where you want to reduce to the mimimal set of
libraries. This option will be more acceptable for people aiming at easy
(transparent you said above) use when it becomes easier to determine which
libraries are needed (or at least which library functions are missing). For
example: I tried to reduce libraries for a large compiled program and used
-explicit-use with csc; the compiled program just reported sys#errror-hook
undefined and I could not figure out which libraries I missed.


reply via email to

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