Scheme language standardization process
On 05/24/2011 11:44 AM, Aaron W. Hsu wrote: >If another release of > Chez Scheme comes out, ABI compatibility now means much more than just > making sure that all the names match. It also means that all the source > code that may have been inlined, must now also remain unchanged or > observationally equivalent at the very least. These sorts of problems crop > up all over the place, and it is difficult to actually achieve ABI > compatibility in the presence of these problems, so Chez does not even try. > > I would be interested in knowing what tradeoffs Guile makes in order to > guarantee the ability to have ABI compatibility between compiles, given > that in the general case this cannot be guaranteed even if the source code > never changes. I suspect we may be talking about two different things: (1) ABI compatibility between Scheme implementation versions. (2) ABI compatibility between between different versions of a library. I think it a reasonable minimal requirement is: Assume no changes in implementation, library sources, switches/options (Makefiles), or user code. I would expect to be able to recompile the library without having to recompile the user code. I realize some compilers may put in time stamps or the equivalent in compiled code, but I think that should be avoided. -- --Per Bothner per@x http://per.bothner.com/ _______________________________________________ Scheme-reports mailing list Scheme-reports@x http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports