From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.83]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8687FBC6C for ; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 12:02:00 +0100 (CET) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgAAAPZzqkfAXQInh2dsb2JhbACQMgEBAQgKKZtp X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.25,316,1199660400"; d="scan'208";a="7044189" Received: from concorde.inria.fr ([192.93.2.39]) by mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 07 Feb 2008 12:02:00 +0100 Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id m17B1xe0000701 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=OK) for ; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 12:02:00 +0100 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Ao8CAH5zqkdQRFuw/2dsb2JhbACsWQ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.25,316,1199660400"; d="scan'208";a="8904722" Received: from furbychan.cocan.org ([80.68.91.176]) by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 07 Feb 2008 12:01:59 +0100 Received: from rich by furbychan.cocan.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JN4Vu-0006S2-Jr for caml-list@inria.fr; Thu, 07 Feb 2008 11:01:54 +0000 Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2008 11:01:54 +0000 To: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] OCaml image blending performance Message-ID: <20080207110154.GA24561@annexia.org> References: <854c25eb0802061229o34a6155dncca9d8492cfe6932@mail.gmail.com> <200802062334.02485.jon@ffconsultancy.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200802062334.02485.jon@ffconsultancy.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) From: Richard Jones X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 47AAE527.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail . ensmp . fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; ocaml:01 inlining:01 ml':01 ocaml:01 byte:01 wrote:01 inline:01 caml-list:01 functions:01 macros:01 macros:01 70%:98 slower:02 string:02 blending:05 On Wed, Feb 06, 2008 at 11:34:02PM +0000, Jon Harrop wrote: > In this case, most of the speed loss can be regained by simply > aggressively inlining everything, which is exactly what you (ab)used > C macros for in the C code. I don't understand this. In 'blend2.ml' (which I was responsible for) C macros are used to inline all the OCaml functions the same as in the C version. Yet it's still 70% slower than the C version. My suspicion was that it was to do with his use of a string as a byte array. Rich. -- Richard Jones Red Hat