Michel Schinz <Michel.Schinz@epfl.ch> writes:
> Le 14 nov. 03, à 22:31, firstname.lastname@example.org a écrit :
>> as we discuss the packaging of libraries, I remembered a feature about
>> libraries that I would like to have besides of having it installed in
>> a structured way. I am not sure, if this issue has been discussed
>> earlier: I'd like to have the possibility of "precompiled" libraries.
> That would definitely be interesting. As a matter of fact, you would
> be interested to know that Olin agrees with you, because he one wrote
> the following in c.l.scheme a few years back:
> By the way, I have for some years now been convinced that the
> single biggest
> technical barrier to using scsh as a perl alternate is the fact
> that S48 has
> been around for about 10 y and still provides no way to separately
> byte-compile modules into loadable object files.
> You can read the whole thread on Google, there:
I have written some code to provide separate compilation of
byte-code. Currently the speedup is not very high (about a factor of
3) but I plan to add what I have to Sunterlib within the next few
I do not want to let the progress of the packaging proposal depend on
the availability of this code and propose therefore to ignore this
issue in the first version.