From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE14ABC88 for ; Mon, 7 Feb 2005 11:57:16 +0100 (CET) Received: from will.iki.fi (will.iki.fi [217.169.64.20]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id j17AvG6V026325 for ; Mon, 7 Feb 2005 11:57:16 +0100 Received: from acerf.exomi.com (fa-3-0-0.fw.exomi.com [217.169.64.99]) by will.iki.fi (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF3C668; Mon, 7 Feb 2005 12:57:15 +0200 (EET) Subject: Re: [Caml-list] The boon of static type checking From: Ville-Pertti Keinonen To: Brian Hurt Cc: skaller , Jon , caml-list@yquem.inria.fr In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 07 Feb 2005 12:57:04 +0200 Message-Id: <1107773824.654.43.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.0.3 FreeBSD GNOME Team Port Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Miltered: at nez-perce with ID 4207498C.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 wrote:01 gcc:01 inlining:01 ocaml:01 inlining:01 closures:01 -inline:01 checking:01 parameter:02 functional:02 functional:02 brian:03 optimization:03 optimization:03 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 (2004-11-16) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled version=3.0.2 X-Spam-Level: On Sun, 2005-02-06 at 23:34 -0600, Brian Hurt wrote: > optimizations to it. Of course, the more I look at SSA, the more it looks > like a functional language to me. So, in effect, the GCC optimization While the single-assignment aspect of SSA could be considered "functional", representing control flow using blocks and branches can't. > Don't assume that inlining is optimization. Actually, it generally isn't. Note that for OCaml, more aggressive inlining could be a significant improvement, not because it would eliminate calls, but because it could eliminate closures. By more aggressive I mean more capable, not just cranking up the -inline parameter. Obviously this doesn't apply to C++.