From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 185D3BCAF for ; Sat, 11 Jun 2005 01:52:50 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ptb-relay04.plus.net (ptb-relay02.plus.net [212.159.14.213]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id j5ANqnim021893 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Sat, 11 Jun 2005 01:52:49 +0200 Received: from [80.229.56.224] (helo=chetara) by ptb-relay04.plus.net with esmtp (Exim) id 1DgtIv-0007Am-9N for caml-list@yquem.inria.fr; Sat, 11 Jun 2005 00:52:49 +0100 From: Jon Harrop Organization: Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Caml on intel-OSX Date: Sat, 11 Jun 2005 00:39:17 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.7.2 References: <1118295206.7145.165.camel@rosella.wigram> <36973.131.254.50.45.1118334009.squirrel@mail.irisa.fr> <1118357500.8693.80.camel@rosella.wigram> In-Reply-To: <1118357500.8693.80.camel@rosella.wigram> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200506110039.18279.jon@ffconsultancy.com> X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 42AA27D1.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 ocaml:01 compiler:01 bug:01 segfaults:01 bug:01 lablgl:01 ocamlopt:01 ocaml's:01 subset:01 ocaml:01 frog:98 wrote:01 native:02 caml:02 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 (2004-11-16) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled version=3.0.2 X-Spam-Level: On Thursday 09 June 2005 23:51, John Skaller wrote: > Whilst I personally prefer the ocaml native code compiler, > at present I can't use it on my AMD64 as there appears > to be a code generation bug in it for that platform -- Yipes! I'm about to release some commercial software for x86 and AMD64 and I really didn't want to hear this! I've been experiencing segfaults on all platforms but I think this is a bug in lablGL rather than ocamlopt. Do you think I shouldn't release for AMD64? How confident are you that this is a codegen bug? Does your code use only OCaml's theoretically safe subset? -- Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. Objective CAML for Scientists http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/ocaml_for_scientists