From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <syshen@nudt.edu.cn>
X-Original-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr
Delivered-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr
Received: from mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.83])
	by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B8B607EE51
	for <caml-list@sympa.inria.fr>; Sun, 14 Apr 2013 15:26:42 +0200 (CEST)
Received-SPF: None (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  syshen@nudt.edu.cn) identity=pra; client-ip=61.187.54.11;
  receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="syshen@nudt.edu.cn";
  x-sender="syshen@nudt.edu.cn"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible
Received-SPF: None (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  syshen@nudt.edu.cn) identity=mailfrom;
  client-ip=61.187.54.11;
  receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="syshen@nudt.edu.cn";
  x-sender="syshen@nudt.edu.cn"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible
Received-SPF: None (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  postmaster@nudt.edu.cn) identity=helo;
  client-ip=61.187.54.11;
  receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="syshen@nudt.edu.cn";
  x-sender="postmaster@nudt.edu.cn";
  x-conformance=sidf_compatible
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AhgLACitalE9uzYLdGdsb2JhbABQhmy9aIFCDgEMFQg8ghaBHgkBAj5fJIgCjTiMMo5MCIhEiRGRSIEXA4kDjgKUKYIb
X-IPAS-Result: AhgLACitalE9uzYLdGdsb2JhbABQhmy9aIFCDgEMFQg8ghaBHgkBAj5fJIgCjTiMMo5MCIhEiRGRSIEXA4kDjgKUKYIb
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.87,470,1363129200"; 
   d="scan'208";a="13192100"
Received: from mail.nudt.edu.cn (HELO nudt.edu.cn) ([61.187.54.11])
  by mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 14 Apr 2013 15:26:40 +0200
Received: by ajax-webmail-coremail.nudt.edu.cn (Coremail) ; Sun, 14 Apr 2013
 21:23:28 +0800 (GMT+08:00)
Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2013 21:23:28 +0800 (GMT+08:00)
From: =?GBK?B?yfLKpNPu?= <syshen@nudt.edu.cn>
To: caml-list <caml-list@inria.fr>
Message-ID: <1cbcde35.47c9.13e08b6f72a.Coremail.syshen@nudt.edu.cn>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; 
	boundary="----=_Part_63583_1267369815.1365945808682"
X-Originating-IP: [113.246.242.103]
X-Priority: 3
X-Mailer: Coremail Webmail Server Version 4.0.5a build
 20121109(20529.5019.5013) Copyright (c) 2002-2013 www.mailtech.cn nudt-out
X-SendMailWithSms: false
X-CM-TRANSID:AQAAf0A5f0TRrWpR_oMfAA--.4712W
X-CM-SenderInfo: xv1vxvnq6q3vvwohv3gofq/1tbiAQAIE1C8Ui+8MAAOsJ
X-Coremail-Antispam: 1Ur529EdanIXcx71UUUUU7IcSsGvfJ3iIAIbVAYjsxI4VW5Jw
	CS07vEb4IE77IF4wCS07vE1I0E4x80FVAKz4kxMIAIbVAFxVCaYxvI4VCIwcAKzIAtYxBI
	daVFxhVjvjDU=
Subject: [Caml-list] [OCAML]:: the cost of List.length


------=_Part_63583_1267369815.1365945808682
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=GBK
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Dear all:


I have a program that run very fast.


Recently, I add a call to List.length to this old program's inner loop, which make it significantly slower.


So what is the cost of List.length, is it liner to the size of the list? or is a const?


Shen
------=_Part_63583_1267369815.1365945808682
Content-Type: text/html; charset=GBK
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Dear all:<div><br></div><div>I have a program that run very fast.</div><div><br></div><div>Recently, I add a call to List.length to this old program's inner loop, which make it significantly slower.</div><div><br></div><div>So what is the cost of List.length, is it liner to the size of the list? or is a const?</div><div><br></div><div>Shen</div>
------=_Part_63583_1267369815.1365945808682--