Re: why is tree-shaking hard?

[barmar@nic.near.net (Barry Margolin)]

In article <3k4gat$5sa@cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu> ram@cs.cmu.edu (Rob MacLachlan) writes:
>You can definitely get better control over size by not loading the stuff you
>don't need.  One way that this has been done in Lisp is by "autoloading", but
>this isn't a complete solution, since it still requires as much or more disk
>space, and may result in worse sharability in multi-user environments.

Multics Maclisp used memory mapping (via the dynamic linker) to access the
code sections of compiled files loaded with LOAD.  It seems that a similar
mechanism could be implemented in modern Unix Lisps.
-- 
Barry Margolin
BBN Planet Corporation, Cambridge, MA
barmar@near.net