From: Jakob Lichtenberg <jakobl@windows.microsoft.com>
To: Olivier Andrieu <oandrieu@nerim.net>
Cc: <caml-list@inria.fr>, Donn Terry <donnte@windows.microsoft.com>
Subject: RE: [Caml-list] Dependencies and rebuilding
Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2007 13:47:20 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <43CD2D195487A448934920501C6EDB2303E34383@WIN-MSG-21.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <95513600703071324j3602604bw4d87a5dee3797c7f@mail.gmail.com>
Olivier,
First of all: Your statement is correct. The following works great:
===
>type base.ml
let base () = 2+8;;
>ocamlopt -c base.ml
>ocamlopt -a base.cmx -o base.cmxa
>del base.cmx base.obj
>type consumer.ml
let _ = Printf.printf "Base.base: %d" (Base.base());;
>ocamlopt -c consumer.ml
>ocamlopt base.cmxa consumer.cmx -o app.exe
>app.exe
Base.base: 10
>notepad base.ml
>ocamlopt -c base.ml
>ocamlopt -a base.cmx -o base.cmxa
>del base.cmx base.obj
>ocamlopt base.cmxa consumer.cmx -o app.exe
>app.exe
Base.base: 11
===
Now, wrt. to cross-module inlining of code: Ohh, that's a very good
reason, I was not aware of this language feature. Is there a higher
level of inlining going on if I leave the .cmx files next to the .cmxa
file? Maybe I should not use .cmxa files at all, for maximum inlining?
If .cmx files is present then what is the .cmxa file used for?
Thanks,
- Jakob
-----Original Message-----
From: oandrieu@gmail.com [mailto:oandrieu@gmail.com] On Behalf Of
Olivier Andrieu
Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2007 1:25 PM
To: Jakob Lichtenberg
Cc: caml-list@inria.fr; Donn Terry
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Dependencies and rebuilding
On 3/7/07, Jakob Lichtenberg <jakobl@windows.microsoft.com> wrote:
> If I change the body of functions in a base library, but not the
> externally visible signature, I still have to recompile the consumers
of
> the base library prior to linking the main application. While this is
> not a problem in the trivial case I'll show beneath, it may be a
concern
> from a componentization and scalability point of view. Regular C code
> does not have this limitation. This e-mail to request why the design
is
> as it is?
I'd say cross-module inlining of code ?
This happens because ocamlopt finds the base.cmx file during the
compilation of consumer. If you put your base module in a library and
remove the .cmx file, consumer won't depend on the implementation of
base, only on its interface.
--
Olivier
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-03-07 21:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-03-07 20:07 Jakob Lichtenberg
2007-03-07 21:24 ` [Caml-list] " Olivier Andrieu
2007-03-07 21:47 ` Jakob Lichtenberg [this message]
2007-03-07 21:25 ` Zheng Li
2007-03-08 7:05 ` [Caml-list] " Alain Frisch
2007-03-08 16:55 ` malc
2007-03-09 8:01 ` Alain Frisch
2007-03-09 8:06 ` malc
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=43CD2D195487A448934920501C6EDB2303E34383@WIN-MSG-21.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com \
--to=jakobl@windows.microsoft.com \
--cc=caml-list@inria.fr \
--cc=donnte@windows.microsoft.com \
--cc=oandrieu@nerim.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox