Re: [Chicken-hackers] Multiple binaries

[Tony Sidaway]

On 9/19/07, Zbigniew <address@hidden> wrote:
> I did the container-file thing when porting sxml-transforms.  There
> were lots of small, existing files, and this reduced namespace
> pollution and avoided creating a ton of .so files.  And the container
> file did some Chicken-specific setup anyway.  That said, from what I
> can gather this approach will not be taken in the future rewrite.
>
> If you don't want to use include (which is probably the easiest
> option) and you don't care about namespace pollution, you could create
> a single egg that installs several shared libraries.  Of course, this
> is pretty close to using include, only at run-time.
>
> I haven't tried the other stuff you suggest.

Thanks.  I did actually give "(declare (unit X) (uses Y))"  a go after
writing that email. and at first sight it seems to work, although it
probably doesn't give much practical advantage over using include.  I
just compiled the units separately as usual and then included the
compiled .o files after the main .scm filename in the "csc -s" (shared
file) compilation.  It's just a matter of personal taste, really.