* Jörg F. Wittenberger [130411 18:36]:
> To sum up: I feel this would be a task to be performed inside
> the compiler and not by some precompile script.
>
>
> Feasible? Rational? How do you guys thing ot it.
>
> Find attached the modified code of yesterdays foobar example,
> which does work.
I found a way to convince chicken to compile with block optimization
and still be able to call those procedures from eval.
However, what's required - at least according to my current knowledge -
is to have a "binding module", which initializes all bindings to
some arbitrary value like #f and expo
>
> Hm. This means that there is only one compilation unit ever?
If you want to compile in block mode, yes.
>
> I've got 82 modules for a single program. Would I have to merge
> them all into a single file if I want -block to take effect?
That's correct.
>
> Well, this would still not cut
On Apr 11 2013, Felix wrote:
From: Jörg F. Wittenberger
Subject: [Chicken-hackers] -block not properly mixing with -strict-types
Date: 10 Apr 2013 19:40:32 +0200
Hi,
I just noticed, that I can't mix -block with -strict-types.
That is, when I -emit-type-file, the resulting file contains
the
