scsh-hackers
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Scsh-hackers] "precompiled" libraries

To: scsh hackers <scsh-hackers@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Scsh-hackers] "precompiled" libraries
From: Andreas Bernauer <andreas.bernauer@gmx.de>
Date: Mon Nov 17 06:49:34 2003
List-id: Discussion among the implementors <scsh-hackers.lists.sourceforge.net>
Mail-followup-to: scsh hackers <scsh-hackers@lists.sourceforge.net>
Sender: scsh-hackers-admin@lists.sourceforge.net
Martin Gasbichler wrote:
> >> 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.
> 
> 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
> weeks. 

Although this is good news, I you are addressing want I meant
initially.  What you've wrote sounds like I'll be able to compile
byte-code to machine-dependent code, so I can "execute" my scsh files
"directly". 

What I meant initially is that I wanted to have scsh libraries
compiled from source code to byte-code so that they can be loaded fast
into scripts.


> 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.

Definitely,  especially as it seems to be more a s48 issue than a scsh
issue.

Andreas.

Attachment: pgp564HFX24MG.pgp
Description: PGP signature

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>