🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <109@c3pe.UUCP> charles@c3pe.UUCP writes:
>In article <1992@mit-eddie.MIT.EDU>, jbs@mit-eddie.MIT.EDU (Jeff Siegal) writes:
>> In article <219@zeus.UUCP> jayb@zeus.UUCP (Jay Beck) writes:
>> >What I would like to see happen is for computer architects (and us software
>> >engineers too) to build systems that eliminate the linkage step when we are
>> >developing and running these large programs.
>> 
>
>In the Multics system (which, granted, requires some pretty unique hardware),
>external references are set to trap the processor when invoked, instead of
>linking in the routines.  A pointer to the desired symbol is left lying around,
>and that's about all the compile-time effort for external reference
>resolution.
>

Burroughs Large Systems (B6700, B7700, et al, and A-series) 
have been doing dynamic linking for many years.  
Originally it was only done for system
library subroutines; 
there was a single 'intrinsic' library that was linked to
at the first reference for each subroutine at run time.  
Today, Burroughs has
gone wholeheartedly towards run-time binding 
to library subroutines.  In fact,
they wanted to eliminate the static binder 
completely, but the user community
made them keep it.  (It had always been buggy, 
and Burroughs didn't want to
fix it.)

(Weird formatting brought to you by 2.10.3 inews)
Craig Jackson
UUCP: {harvard,linus}!axiom!drilex!dricej
BIX:  cjackson
-- 
Craig Jackson
UUCP: {harvard,linus}!axiom!drilex!dricej
BIX:  cjackson