Re: binary interface

[Keisuke Nishida]

At Fri, 2 Mar 2001 11:11:36 +0100 (MET),
Dirk Herrmann wrote:
> 
> I think I understand the point.  However, is this actually a concern in
> the current state of development?  It seems to me that the use (or
> non-use) of mmap is an optimization that we can decide about later.  Thus,
> we should not modify core parts of guile (like the implementation of
> smobs) to prepare for such an optimization now.

I'm sure we will want to use it, since Guile is an extension language
system that is used by several applications.  We won't want to waste
resources by loading the same file for each application.

I'm not actually optimizing stuff.  I'm just thinking about loading
in a way we can take advantage of shared mmap.

> However, we may find later that such a feature is interesting for guile.
> Thus I suggest to either turn the current solution (and maybe parts of the
> discussion) into a proposal, and/or tag the current state of cvs such that
> we can resurrect the implementation at that time.  For now, we should not
> add this stuff.  (The decision, however, is certainly up to the
> maintainers.)

I agree with this.  It's not ready for real use.  I'll move the code
from the core to my VM.