On Tue, 2 Apr 2013, David Matthews wrote:
Well, that was the intention behind the changes I made with version 5.0.
5.0 originally only had PolyML.export as the way of exporting the state.
PolyML.SaveState was added later.
People have occasionally pointed out to me that the bias of Poly/ML to
the good old image dumping looks very alien to the man on the street.
Systems like OCaml imitate the compile/link phase of cc more
faithfully, which gives many people a better feeling. (I am personally
not very excited about how OCaml compilation works.)
One could do a little bit here by including certain polyml options or
shell scripts by default, to address both the scripting and the
batch-compilation problem in a way that looks familiar to the masses.
Do you has something else in mind apart from PolyML.export? Perhaps
some form of separate compilation of modules? I'm not familiar with
OCaml.
Actual separate compilation is a different thing. I don't think there is
a real need for that in Poly/ML. The compiler is fast enough to compile
huge applications from scratch.
Personally I don't have any requirements beyond what Poly/ML does already.
What "the man in the street" wants to see, though, is something that looks
and feels like "polymlc ..." just like "cc ...", although that might sound
a bit silly.
Makarius
_______________________________________________
polyml mailing list
polyml@inf.ed.ac.uk
http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/polyml
