On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 02:32:13AM +0100, Nicolas Cellier wrote:
> For FreeType, it was true: many nasty extensions and many nasty overrides
> made the load rather intrusive...
> Now, the package split is not at good boundary, the constants are not
> enough: indeed, during some initialization, the layout of most (all?)
> classes known to the primitives is scanned, thus all these classes must be
> present in the VM-Making image...
> 

That is my fault. I should have checked it more carefully before suggesting
that the FT2 constants be split out as a separate package. Sorry.

Dave

> 
> 2013/11/15 tim Rowledge <tim at rowledge.org>
> 
> >
> > (Various attributions probably screwed up by me using a soft keyboard.
> > Please don't be offended )
> > >>
> > >> Because otherwise "so what" if FFI includes the constants and VMMaker
> > >> depends on it solely for that portion of it?  How many methods making
> > >> up FFI are we talking about?  There are plenty of _other_ methods in
> > >> the image which are not being used by VMMaker, what about them?
> > >>
> > In some cases it won't matter but in others it may be rather important.
> > FFI is an example where I think it is important to be able have only the
> > constants parcel added to vmmaker. Likewise for FreeType constants, where
> > it is very obvious that adding the entire package can be problematic on
> > occasion.
> >
> > Ideally the packaging system ought to be able to deal with single method
> > packages and bundling them as required for specific needs. I'm not arguing
> > that that is necessarily a good way to do it but the mechanism ought to
> > make possible. Why would it matter to the loader whether the thing being
> > loaded is a single file of a gazillion methods or a gazillion files of one
> > method?
> >
> > tim
> >

>