# Proposal: care more about OCaml bindings for popular libraries

**URL:** <https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/proposal-care-more-about-ocaml-bindings-for-popular-libraries/11451>\
**Category:** Ecosystem\
**Created:** [February 18, 2023, 6:43am UTC](https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/proposal-care-more-about-ocaml-bindings-for-popular-libraries/11451 "2023-02-18T06:43:32Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 3

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![alan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/a87d85/32.png) [@alan](https://discuss.ocaml.org/u/alan)\
**Post date:** [February 20, 2023, 4:31am UTC](https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/proposal-care-more-about-ocaml-bindings-for-popular-libraries/11451/3 "2023-02-20T04:31:24Z")

</div>

> [@kayceesrk](#):
>
> This is not correct. Sequential programs running on OCaml 4 can be moved to OCaml 5 without any breakages.

Pure OCaml 4 programs still work with OCaml 5, but the FFI has a breaking change: [naked pointers are no longer supported](https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/ann-a-dynamic-checker-for-detecting-naked-pointers/5805). The LLVM bindings use naked pointers, so I have been authoring a patch to replace the use of naked pointers so that the bindings work on OCaml 5. My patch currently passes the tests, so I feel optimistic, but it’s a lot of code to review.

---

_[View the full topic](https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/proposal-care-more-about-ocaml-bindings-for-popular-libraries/11451)._