Hi David ! Thanks for the pointer. From my understanding of the use of caml_startup (or caml_main), this means that the caml runtime is global. In Rubyk, each "object" (processing unit) is separated from all other objects (no globals) so that we can properly encapsulate operations without side effects and provide fine grained locking (concurrency is important).
Is there a way to avoid: 1. global locking (or locking only during script recompilation) 2. script level encapsulation Point (2) would mean that if object "a" contains the script: let foo a, b = ... do something and object "b" contains: let foo x, y = ... do something else The recompilation of script "b" does not change the definition of function "foo". One possible solution would be to force the creation of singleton classes for each script named after the script name (unique): let script_a = object method foo a, b = ... end;; let script_b = method foo x, y = ... do something else (does not hide script_a::foo) end;; This would solve the encapsulation problem, but what about concurrent calls to ocaml from C ? Is this possible ? Gaspard On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 9:06 AM, David MENTRE <dmen...@linux-france.org> wrote: > > Hello, > > 2010/7/8 Gaspard Bucher <gasp...@teti.ch>: > > 1. Is it possible to embed an ocaml compiler ? (something that eats > > std::string and produces a callable thing) > > No, not the compiler. It is however possible to embed an interpreter > and to load byte code (and native code?) on demand: > http://caml.inria.fr/pub/docs/manual-ocaml/manual032.html#toc134 > > > 2. How would an interface between C++ and a compiled script work ? (passing > > values, getting return values) > > Through a C interface. See above link. > > Sincerely yours, > david _______________________________________________ Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management: http://yquem.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/caml-list Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs
