On Wed, Mar 9, 2022 at 2:47 PM Julian Fondren <[email protected]> wrote: > I got very little through February for various reasons, but I'm back > on it. I think static linking is the best way as well, including to > avoid newer builds of J having new dependencies that make J not work > on machines where it previously did, but if so it probably can't be GMP > for licensing reasons. My plan's just to get something working, with the > expectation that various issues like this will be easy to decide later.
Dynamic linking would be for the commercial licensing folks, and they have the funds to support that part of the development (I expect that this would be a relatively minor bit of work, after everything else is done). For now, keeping this kind of thing in a separate repository or branch should be sufficient. Later, having a switch to select the implementation might be nice. Some people might want legacy j or openssl. But the hard work is defining the interface between J and the arbitrary precision library, for each of the numeric primitives and for the associated memory management. And, having a relatively clean interface there is what would make the other possibilities viable. Thanks, -- Raul ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
