From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <jon@ffconsultancy.com>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.4 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 9DE46BBC4
	for <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>; Mon,  2 Mar 2009 17:13:21 +0100 (CET)
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AjYCANSUq0nUnwckjmdsb2JhbACCKJJIAQEBAQkLCAkPBsE9hBoG
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.38,289,1233529200"; 
   d="scan'208";a="21927762"
Received: from relay.ptn-ipout02.plus.net ([212.159.7.36])
  by mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-SHA; 02 Mar 2009 17:13:21 +0100
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: At0EAJeUq0nUnw4U/2dsb2JhbACCKNQ+hBoG
Received: from pih-relay08.plus.net ([212.159.14.20])
  by relay.ptn-ipout02.plus.net with ESMTP; 02 Mar 2009 16:13:21 +0000
Received: from [87.112.14.152] (helo=leper.local)
	 by pih-relay08.plus.net with esmtp (Exim) id 1LeAlc-0007Jy-Kz
	for caml-list@yquem.inria.fr; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 16:13:20 +0000
From: Jon Harrop <jon@ffconsultancy.com>
Organization: Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Odd performance result with HLVM
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 16:18:39 +0000
User-Agent: KMail/1.9.9
References: <200902280112.24115.jon@ffconsultancy.com> <200902282152.18430.jon@ffconsultancy.com> <49ABED07.30800@imag.fr>
In-Reply-To: <49ABED07.30800@imag.fr>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200903021618.39808.jon@ffconsultancy.com>
X-Plusnet-Relay: 1b700f178bc5e54a1ff02510269a7e80
X-Spam: no; 0.00; ocamlopt:01 compilation:01 run-time:01 compilation:01 polymorphism:01 ocaml:01 equivalently:01 bool:01 struct:01 2009:98 frog:98 polymorphic:01 polymorphic:01 wrote:01 caml-list:01 

On Monday 02 March 2009 14:28:23 Florent Ouchet wrote:
> Jon Harrop a =E9crit :
> > There are really two major advantages over the current ocamlopt design
> > and both stem from the use of JIT compilation:
> >
> > . Run-time types allow per-type functions like generic pretty printers
> > and comparison.
> >
> > . Monomorphisation during JIT compilation completely removes the
> > performance cost of polymorphism, e.g. floats, tuples and records are
> > never boxed.
>
> Do you mean that each polymorphic function is compiled into a different
> native piece of code each time it is called with different parameter
> types?

Yes.

> How does the JIT'ed code size compare to ocamlopt'ed code size?=20

No idea. Without a front end I have only compiled the smallest pieces of te=
st=20
code so far, just to make sure that the functionality works.

=2ENET does the same thing and it offers substantial performance improvemen=
ts=20
over OCaml for polymorphic code.

Note that there is no reason to distinguish between reference types for the=
y=20
can all be treated equivalently with respect to instantiating polymorphic=20
code. My type system is as follows:

type t =3D
    [ `Unit
    | `Bool
    | `Int
    | `Float
    | `Struct of t list
    | `Array of t
    | `Function of t list * t
    | `Reference ]

=2D-=20
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e