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 MAA19653; Sun, 13 Oct 2002 12:05:23 +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 MAA19422 for ; Sun, 13 Oct 2002 12:05:22 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from mel-rto3.wanadoo.fr (smtp-out-3.wanadoo.fr [193.252.19.233]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id g9DA5M520235; Sun, 13 Oct 2002 12:05:22 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from mel-rta7.wanadoo.fr (193.252.19.61) by mel-rto3.wanadoo.fr (6.5.007) id 3DA24D180034EAE0; Sun, 13 Oct 2002 12:05:21 +0200 Received: from iliana (80.14.240.235) by mel-rta7.wanadoo.fr (6.5.007) id 3DA24BE60032D12C; Sun, 13 Oct 2002 12:05:21 +0200 Received: from luther by iliana with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 180fm9-0000Zi-00; Sun, 13 Oct 2002 12:15:09 +0200 Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2002 12:15:09 +0200 To: Xavier Leroy Cc: Sven LUTHER , caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Runtime overflow and what to do Message-ID: <20021013101509.GA2181@iliana> References: <3DA6A4ED.5050700@baretta.com> <200210121613.MAA27433@psi-phi.mit.edu> <20021012165831.GA4700@iliana> <20021013113130.L13771@pauillac.inria.fr> <20021013095216.GA1949@iliana> <20021013115725.P13771@pauillac.inria.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20021013115725.P13771@pauillac.inria.fr> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i From: Sven LUTHER Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk On Sun, Oct 13, 2002 at 11:57:25AM +0200, Xavier Leroy wrote: > > Which would be the relevant flags ? > > No idea. If you're interested, you figure them out :-) Ok, ... Still i have difficulties understanding how this work, in my idea bytecode was build once run everywhere, how does this go with your statement that it can be made to use 64bit integers by a compiler switch ? Mmm, maybe you are speaking about ocamlrun only ? > > More importantly, i suppose code compiled in this fashion for 64 bit > > sparcs will not build on 32 bit sparc boxes, if these kind of boxes are > > still available anyway. > > Yes (to both). I still don't have access to a 64-bit SPARC machine. Do you want access ? I can try to arrange that if you want. To an hppa machine also. > > > The above is for the bytecode interpreter. For the native-code > > > compiler, the current Sparc code emitter mandates 32-bit integers. > > > > Would it be much work to build a 64-bit integers target ? > > A few days for someone who knows the SPARC64 assembly language well. Ok, ... Friendly, Sven Luther ------------------- 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