From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.82]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F9D1BBAF for ; Tue, 7 Dec 2010 10:43:07 +0100 (CET) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AuwEADeQ/UxQW+UMgWdsb2JhbACjOxUBARYiIogtuEOFSQSFHIVV X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.59,310,1288566000"; d="scan'208";a="91714844" Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]) by mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 07 Dec 2010 10:43:07 +0100 Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PPu4g-0002Zn-Ft for caml-list@inria.fr; Tue, 07 Dec 2010 10:43:06 +0100 Received: from avelizy-155-1-50-177.w86-217.abo.wanadoo.fr ([86.217.25.177]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 07 Dec 2010 10:43:06 +0100 Received: from sylvain by avelizy-155-1-50-177.w86-217.abo.wanadoo.fr with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 07 Dec 2010 10:43:06 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: caml-list@inria.fr From: Sylvain Le Gall Subject: Re: Pre-compiled ocaml binary for windows Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2010 09:42:48 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <20101203200646.GA7445@malaquias.DHCP-GERAL> <6C7D3CF0-5C04-4E51-939F-5086244DA055@inria.fr> <4CFD2259.6060200@gmail.com> <4CFDEE7E.8030000@frisch.fr> <4CFDFEA5.3000900@frisch.fr> X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: avelizy-155-1-50-177.w86-217.abo.wanadoo.fr User-Agent: slrn/pre1.0.0-18 (Linux) X-Spam: no; 0.00; le-gall:01 pre-compiled:01 ocaml:01 frisch:01 frisch:01 ocamlopt:01 toolchain:01 masm:01 masm:01 fwiw:01 compiler:01 lexifi's:01 ocamlopt:01 ocaml:01 runtime:01 On 07-12-2010, Alain Frisch wrote: > On 12/07/2010 10:03 AM, Sylvain Le Gall wrote: >> We will provide ocamlopt (32/64 bits). But indeed, the toolchain can be >> an issue (esp. masm). I plan to use VS2008. > > I don't think MASM is going to be an issue. FWIW, the Windows 7 SDK > (which has nothing to do with Windows 7) contains everything needed > (including the VS2008 C compiler, the assembler, the linker, the > libraries, etc). > Probably a good item for documentation/installation screen/link on the future website of ocaml-installer. >> Maybe the native Lexifi's amd64/x86 backend is a better option. If we >> are able to use this backend, we still have to use a linker ? > > This native backend removes the need for an external assembler for using > ocamlopt. Flexdll has a standalone mode to build DLLs which works fine > to build pure OCaml .cmxs plugins for ocamlopt (there might be some > issues when linking C libraries in the cmxs). But yes, to build the main > program, you still need an external linker (this could be addressed by > working more on flexdll) and also static runtime objects and libraries. > > An option could be to ship a minimalistic main program, which simply > dynlinks .cmxs files given on its command line. > You mean like ld.ocaml: https://forge.ocamlcore.org/projects/ld-ocaml/ >>> Not building labltk seems ok. As for the graphical toplevel, I think >>> there are some pending bugs (random crashes) with the current version >>> under recent versions of Windows, so it's probably better not to include >>> it. Some support for installing the emacs mode automatically and/or a >>> version of ledit would be useful replacements. >>> >> >> I didn't known this fact. This is another reason for not building >> labltk. Since I almost never use it, I don't think it will be a big >> loose. > > The graphical toplevel does not depend on labltk, so the two issues are > really unrelated. For crashes with the OCamlWin.exe, I was thinking > about http://caml.inria.fr/mantis/view.php?id=4399 and > http://caml.inria.fr/mantis/view.php?id=3052, but this might be pure > FUD. The real problem is that nobody seems interested enough in this > graphical toplevel to put serious work on it. > Thanks for the clarification. I didn't made a clear answer, but I know that labltk and OCamlWin are 2 separate things. > >> I will probably look for ledit (or lwt toplevel) which seems a better >> alternative to emacs (too heavy too install). > > If your hope is to make OCaml accessible to beginner hobbyists under > Windows (I assume this is the primary audience for pre-compiled > binaries), you might still want to provide easy ways to use code > editors. Providing easy access only to the toplevel (be it graphical, or > with a line-editor) might be a turnoff for beginners. > You are right, in this case I will probably take into consideration this project: http://ocamleditor.forge.ocamlcore.org/ It has started on Windows ;-) Regards, Sylvain Le Gall