From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr 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 0531ABB81 for ; Mon, 28 Nov 2005 10:33:30 +0100 (CET) Received: from pauillac.inria.fr (pauillac.inria.fr [128.93.11.35]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id jAS9XT5q007061 for ; Mon, 28 Nov 2005 10:33:29 +0100 Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id KAA11309 for ; Mon, 28 Nov 2005 10:33:28 +0100 (MET) Received: from smtp3.adl2.internode.on.net (smtp3.adl2.internode.on.net [203.16.214.203]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id jAS9XQ9c031836 for ; Mon, 28 Nov 2005 10:33:27 +0100 Received: from rosella (ppp33-4.lns1.syd2.internode.on.net [59.167.33.4] (may be forged)) by smtp3.adl2.internode.on.net (8.12.9/8.12.6) with ESMTP id jAS9XMv4039339; Mon, 28 Nov 2005 20:03:23 +1030 (CST) (envelope-from skaller@users.sourceforge.net) Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Obj or not Obj From: skaller To: Nicolas Cannasse Cc: Christophe Raffalli , Brian Hurt , caml-list@inria.fr In-Reply-To: <438AC2AE.3040200@motion-twin.com> References: <4387ACC9.2040107@motion-twin.com> <438A4CAA.6070006@univ-savoie.fr> <438AC2AE.3040200@motion-twin.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 20:33:21 +1100 Message-Id: <1133170401.4593.138.camel@rosella> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.4.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Miltered: at nez-perce with ID 438ACEE9.002 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 438ACEE6.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 cannasse:01 stack:01 fpls:01 stack:01 bounded:01 unix:01 wrote:01 heap:01 sourceforge:01 artificial:01 nicolas:02 overflow:04 space:07 theory:07 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.3 (2005-04-27) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled version=3.0.3 On Mon, 2005-11-28 at 09:41 +0100, Nicolas Cannasse wrote: > But using the stack is getting speed against correctness, since it will > overflow for big lists. But that is an artefact of Unix implementations designed for flat C code, rather than FPLs. In theory both stack and heap are bounded only by the smaller of artificial (that is, deliberately imposed) limits and total address space. -- John Skaller Felix, successor to C++: http://felix.sf.net