caml-list - the Caml user's mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Oleg <oleg_inconnu@myrealbox.com>
To: caml-list@inria.fr
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] O'Caml vs C++: a little benchmark
Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2002 15:06:35 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200208181906.PAA00297@hickory.cc.columbia.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <15711.57520.125841.25102@beertje.william.bogus>

On Sunday 18 August 2002 02:00 pm, William Chesters wrote:
> the compiler [...] doesn't inline anything between
> compilation units.  

I was always curious about this. If I were to change Array module, but not 
its interface, ocamlopt would ask me to recompile (not just re-link) 
everything that depends on Array, which means that ocamlopt looks at Array 
_implementation_, while compiling (not linking) code that depends on it.
In view of this, what stopped O'Caml creators from letting ocamlopt inline 
functions across module boundaries (especially if it's true that this could 
be responsible for a 100x speed boost)?

> You would see this clearly in the assembler output
> if you used ocamlopt -S.

Is there a tutorial for reading those *.s files ocamlopt produces?

Cheers
Oleg
-------------------
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


  reply	other threads:[~2002-08-18 19:06 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2002-08-18 17:17 Oleg
2002-08-18 18:00 ` William Chesters
2002-08-18 19:06   ` Oleg [this message]
2002-08-18 21:37     ` William Chesters
2002-08-19 13:02   ` Xavier Leroy
2002-08-19 13:58     ` [Caml-list] Inlining across functors (was: O'Caml vs C++: a little benchmark) Thorsten Ohl
2002-08-19 21:16       ` malc
2002-08-19 22:06         ` [Caml-list] Specialization (was: Inlining across functors) Thorsten Ohl
2002-08-20  6:35           ` [Caml-list] " malc
2002-08-20  6:25         ` [Caml-list] Inlining across functors (was: O'Caml vs C++: a little benchmark) malc
2002-08-19 14:39     ` [Caml-list] O'Caml vs C++: a little benchmark Oleg
2002-08-19 15:15     ` William Chesters
2002-08-18 19:16 ` Markus Mottl
2002-08-18 19:58   ` Oleg
2002-08-18 22:59     ` Markus Mottl
2002-08-19 13:12 ` malc
2002-08-19 13:22 ` malc
2002-08-23 21:05 ` John Max Skaller
2002-08-23 21:35   ` Oleg
2002-08-28 13:47     ` John Max Skaller
2002-08-28 14:34       ` Alain Frisch
2002-08-28 17:23       ` inlining tail-recursive functions (Re: [Caml-list] O'Caml vs C++: a little benchmark) Oleg
2002-08-31  1:13         ` John Max Skaller

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=200208181906.PAA00297@hickory.cc.columbia.edu \
    --to=oleg_inconnu@myrealbox.com \
    --cc=caml-list@inria.fr \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).