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 JAA16974; Sun, 17 Nov 2002 09:35:47 +0100 (MET) 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 JAA16970 for ; Sun, 17 Nov 2002 09:35:46 +0100 (MET) Received: from mel-rto4.wanadoo.fr (smtp-out-4.wanadoo.fr [193.252.19.23]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id gAH8ZjX24726 for ; Sun, 17 Nov 2002 09:35:45 +0100 (MET) Received: from mel-rta7.wanadoo.fr (193.252.19.61) by mel-rto4.wanadoo.fr (6.5.007) id 3DA24D320178B8F3; Sun, 17 Nov 2002 09:35:45 +0100 Received: from iliana (80.11.160.89) by mel-rta7.wanadoo.fr (6.5.007) id 3DD3B2560016CDFF; Sun, 17 Nov 2002 09:35:45 +0100 Received: from luther by iliana with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18DKu8-0000Kk-00; Sun, 17 Nov 2002 09:35:44 +0100 Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2002 09:35:43 +0100 To: Basile STARYNKEVITCH Cc: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] native code toplevel Message-ID: <20021117083543.GA1273@iliana> References: <200211161432.gAGEWo124537@nez-perce.inria.fr> <15831.20596.196145.659042@hector.lesours> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <15831.20596.196145.659042@hector.lesours> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i From: Sven Luther Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk On Sun, Nov 17, 2002 at 09:16:52AM +0100, Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote: > >>>>> "Oleg" == Oleg writes: > > Oleg> Hi I found the same question in the archives, but with no > Oleg> answers: why isn't there a native code toplevel? Sometimes I > Oleg> need high performance and interactivity (CMUCL can do it, > Oleg> why not O'Caml?) > > I also share the same wishes. And actually, the toplevel might > (suboptimally) dynamically translate the bytecode to machine code > (i.e. do Just In Time compilation). I think the last time this subject came up on the list, it was said that the bytecode does not contain as much information as is needed by the native code compiler, in particular, i think the bytecode does not contain any kind of type information. That said, i guess you could store some kind of intermediary representation instead, and compile from that, but it is worth it ? 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