Re: CLN instead of mpwrap

[George <jirka@5z.com>]

On Fri, Feb 11, 2000 at 06:53:19AM +0000, Aaron Lehmann wrote:
> > I'm investigating how to replace mpwrap and a lot of the genius routines with
> > CLN.  So perhaps you may see some genius breakage in the coming days because
> > of this.  This may actually speed up the process of the new interface as it
> > will take care of modularizing a large part of the engine.  It also seems
> > like cln will be quite a bit faster then mpwrap which eats cache for
> > breakfast.
> 
> Is this something that we would be using instead of GMP? I like the
> OOPness of it :)

I like OOPness, I don't like the C++ness of it.  However there is no nice C
library and mpwrap does suck.

> > The only thing is that I can't find rpms for this beast.  The homepage is at
> > http://clisp.cons.org/~haible/packages-cln.html
> 
> Shouldn't be needed. I would hate to have yet another dependencey for
> dr-genius, especially one of which no rpm's are available. Unfortunately,
> it looks very large, perhaps too large to include in the source tree.
> 
> I would advise making dr-genius so it will compile out of the box on a
> kitchen-sink redhat install. reqiring users to download and install
> prerequisite packages is a major burden on the users.

We can stuff it into the tree, though it takes quite long to compile (I'm
having some compile problems but those seem to be egcs problems and I'm
upgrading my compiler anyway)

I don't think the "kitchen sink redhat install" thing is all that necessary.
Dependancies are not bad as long as they are not a hassle to install.  If we
do provide rpms including binaries for cln, I think we are quite off the hook
there.  Those rpms are installed only once and not recompiled all the time.

George