Hello, On Thursday 10 August 2006 07:31, Peter Tanski wrote: ...
Summary: I finally settled on modifying OpenSSL, since that would be ...
Being a heavy user of Haskell Integers, I have followed this development with great interest. Although your decision has its drawbacks, it could very well be the best, all things considered. I would like to mention a few things that I have not seen discussed: Clearly, using an existing library unmodified would be preferable: New developments, error corrections, documentation, wide exposure, all of these things would be available. I have looked briefly at the OpenSSL Bignum library and in the areas of memory management, but also error handling, it seems clearly intertwined to some extent with OpenSSL in ways which would appear to rule out the direct use of this library for GHC Integers. However, considering the advantages of using an existing library unchanged, we might consider another possibility: Working with the OpenSSL people to modify their library to allow the sort of interfacing that is needed for its direct and efficient use in GHC. While, of course, retaining its value as part of OpenSSL. (And way further back: Have we tried to discuss the LGPL licence of GMP with the authors? I am not really into all these matters, sorry if this doesn't make sense.) Failing that, I would suggest considering the development of the modified library to a form that would allow independent use, apart from its use in GHC. This would add valuable possibilities to your options when choosing the precise mixture of Haskell and, perhaps, raw C code that best balances your performance desires and needs for convenience. I wish you the best of luck with your work. Regards Thorkil