At 12:34 PM 1/2/01 -0500, Andy Dougherty wrote:
>If you want to experiment with modifying perl5's bigints and bigfloats
>with a tuned library to get an idea of how much speed we're talking about,
>gmp is probably the best bet to get a good estimate with the least amount
>of effort (though it doesn't look as if it's been ported to VMS, and it
>didn't build for me under Solaris 8 when I just tested it ...). If you
>want to redistribute the code, of course, then you need to think about
>licensing issues.
I think gmp/fgmp is probably the best place to start, if I can get the fgmp
code building with enough abuse. It ought to be simple enough, and we'll
need to smack it around some for perl's memory management anyway.
>(Does the LPGL and the existence of fgmp make it ok to
>distribute the interface/XS code and rely on the end user to install gmp
>if they so choose? Ick. I hate licensing problems.)
I'd think so. More to the point, if we provide the source to fgmp, and use
gmp if we can, I think we're OK.
I'm beginning to loathe software licenses in a *big* way, and I'm a half
step away from saying to hell with it all and going fully public domain.
(Or at least pushing for it, as I don't control perl's licensing terms)
Liceses. Bletch.
Dan
--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
