On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 3:37 AM, harry <voldermort@hotmail.com> wrote:

Brandon Allbery <allbery.b <at> gmail.com> writes:
> Why isn't this avoided by installing packages without inlining? Packages ...

>
> Because the performance is somewhere between horrible and abysmal.

Thank you, does this mean that dynamic linking wouldn't work either?

Dynamic linking is an even bigger ball of snakes, yes. :/ A better solution would be nice, but I'm not aware of any magic that can be applied to it. (The GHC devs know a better solution is needed; unfortunately, the best they've come up with is a proposal to build everything against everything else in every possible combination....) Not that there are any better ideas sitting around. Maybe whole program compilation, which would require all libraries to be available in source form (and would make dynamic linking meaningless since every compiled library would be a one-off).

--

brandon s allbery kf8nh                               sine nomine associates

allbery.b@gmail.com                                  ballbery@sinenomine.net

unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonad        http://sinenomine.net

_______________________________________________
Beginners mailing list
Beginners@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/beginners