Replacement for GMP: Update
naur at post11.tele.dk
Thu Aug 10 17:26:12 EDT 2006
On Thursday 10 August 2006 07:31, Peter Tanski wrote:
> Summary: I finally settled on modifying OpenSSL, since that would be
Being a heavy user of Haskell Integers, I have followed this development with
great interest. Although your decision has its drawbacks, it could very well
be the best, all things considered.
I would like to mention a few things that I have not seen discussed: Clearly,
using an existing library unmodified would be preferable: New developments,
error corrections, documentation, wide exposure, all of these things would be
I have looked briefly at the OpenSSL Bignum library and in the areas of memory
management, but also error handling, it seems clearly intertwined to some
extent with OpenSSL in ways which would appear to rule out the direct use of
this library for GHC Integers. However, considering the advantages of using
an existing library unchanged, we might consider another possibility: Working
with the OpenSSL people to modify their library to allow the sort of
interfacing that is needed for its direct and efficient use in GHC. While, of
course, retaining its value as part of OpenSSL.
(And way further back: Have we tried to discuss the LGPL licence of GMP with
the authors? I am not really into all these matters, sorry if this doesn't
Failing that, I would suggest considering the development of the modified
library to a form that would allow independent use, apart from its use in
GHC. This would add valuable possibilities to your options when choosing the
precise mixture of Haskell and, perhaps, raw C code that best balances your
performance desires and needs for convenience.
I wish you the best of luck with your work.
More information about the Glasgow-haskell-users