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 LAA24324; Thu, 25 Jul 2002 11:31:22 +0200 (MET DST) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f 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 LAA24145 for ; Thu, 25 Jul 2002 11:31:21 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from pauillac.inria.fr (pauillac.inria.fr [128.93.11.35]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id g6P9UnT13862; Thu, 25 Jul 2002 11:30:49 +0200 (MET DST) Received: (from xleroy@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id LAA24304; Thu, 25 Jul 2002 11:30:49 +0200 (MET DST) Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 11:30:49 +0200 From: Xavier Leroy To: Chris Hecker Cc: "O'Caml Mailing List" Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Bigarray map & set/get (long) Message-ID: <20020725113049.C23741@pauillac.inria.fr> References: <20020719.155940.19123621.Christophe.Troestler@umh.ac.be> <20020719.155940.19123621.Christophe.Troestler@umh.ac.be> <20020722113136.A10720@pauillac.inria.fr> <4.3.2.7.2.20020724194422.028aa970@mail.d6.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0i In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20020724194422.028aa970@mail.d6.com>; from checker@d6.com on Wed, Jul 24, 2002 at 08:02:04PM -0700 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk > The problem with this is that sometimes you don't want the discontinuity > and inconvenience of calling to C. Obviously, it'd be nice if we could do > everything in ocaml from a simplicity and consistency standpoint, assuming > it's not an infinite amount of work to get there. > > There is an important middle ground between "not caring about speed" and > "needing the highest end BLAS performance", and since CPUs are making bad > code fast faster than they're making good code fast, the middle ground is > moving higher up the importance ladder, and getting easier to attain. Agreed, but in this case (as I mentioned in my earlier post) you'd get better performance by just using regular float arrays rather than bigarrays.(*) Thus, I recommend using bigarrays only when interfacing with C or Fortran numerical code. - Xavier Leroy (*) This isn't quite right: on some platforms (PowerPC, Sparc, Mips), a 1D bigarray can actually be slightly more efficient than a float array, because of memory alignment properties. But this isn't true on the Pentium. ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners