From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id PAA09072; Mon, 17 Sep 2001 15:55:48 +0200 (MET DST) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id PAA09006 for ; Mon, 17 Sep 2001 15:55:48 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from chopin.ai.univie.ac.at (chopin.ai.univie.ac.at [131.130.174.170]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f8HDtkD00173 for ; Mon, 17 Sep 2001 15:55:46 +0200 (MET DST) Received: (from markus@localhost) by chopin.ai.univie.ac.at (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian 8.9.3-21) id PAA23204 for caml-list@inria.fr; Mon, 17 Sep 2001 15:55:45 +0200 Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2001 15:55:45 +0200 From: Markus Mottl To: OCAML Subject: [Caml-list] byte-code and -fno-defer-pop Message-ID: <20010917155545.A23056@chopin.ai.univie.ac.at> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk Hello, C-files in the OCaml-distribution are usually compiled with -fno-defer-pop when they are supposed to be used with byte code, too. What is the rationale behind? Is this only intended to limit stack growth a bit or are there other reasons? This opposite of this option is normally turned on when optimisation (-O) is used. Would you recommend this setting generally for C-code that should cooperate with OCaml-byte code? Thanks for enlightenment! Regards, Markus Mottl -- Markus Mottl markus@oefai.at Austrian Research Institute for Artificial Intelligence http://www.oefai.at/~markus ------------------- Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr