On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 1:10 PM, Andrey Tcherepanov <xnow4fippy...@sneakemail.com> wrote: > > Would replacement of "pure" > compiled-and-ready-to-be-linked library packaging with just compiled and > compressed AST (probably lightly optimized) be a better solution?
Thanks. It's a fine approach but it's a considerable amount of design and implementation, and it's not completely clear it's possible at all. If someone wants to make implementing such a scheme a longer-term goal, that would be interesting. But discussing that will distract us from Russ's question, which is: should we continue to support binary packages approximately as they exist today? Ian -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
