2012/3/14 Matej Košík <5764c029b688c1c0d24a2e97cd7...@gmail.com>: > There are two scenarios when I use the compiler: > > Scenario 1 (most frequent): when I want to incrementally remove typing > errors during development. Various optimizations do not matter here. > What matters is a short time to rebuild everything (that has to be rebuilt). > > Scenario 2 (rare one): to produce the final product > where quality of various optimizations matter more than > the amount of required compilation time > > If dropping dependencies of *.cmx files on other *.cmx files (rather > than on *.cmi files) requires manual intervention or careful thinking, > then ocamlopt, with this behavior, is not ideal tool for Scenario 1 > (while still being perfectly suitable for Scenario 2).
Scenario 1 is exactly what bytecode compilation is for, and it is indeed fast and without dependencies on .cmo. -- E tutto per oggi, a la prossima volta Virgile -- Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management and archives: https://sympa-roc.inria.fr/wws/info/caml-list Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs
