[Lazarus] Binary Package System Discussion?

[Mark Morgan Lloyd]

Den wrote:
> Hello all,
> 
>     I know this has been brought up from time to time, but the more I 
> use NetBeans and other big editors.. The more I miss the fact that it 
> isolates you from being in their pool of source code to build whenever 
> you add a component, etc.  Having a binary-only Lazarus would mean an 
> entire overhaul of a binary package system.  What would be amazing to 
> see actually, is FPC being able to compile into a universal object 
> (which supports the basic byte code, and sections which will only be 
> used when converting to a certain architecture if necessary.. Like SSE 
> optimized code), then being able to convert into native code at 
> destination machine.  Something like Chrome's Native Client does now, 
> which compiles the code into a universal op-code base, and converts it 
> to native at their servers..

Doesn't NaCl use LLVM?

>     Having this universal binary package system, means we can distribute 
> one package, and have it convert on the destination machine.  Means we 
> don't really have to do tricks when distributing your unit when you 
> don't want to distribute the source code (ie. Commercial Packages).

-- 
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]