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=0.1 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 mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BBE1BBC4 for ; Sun, 5 Apr 2009 04:49:35 +0200 (CEST) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AiYBAHO510nUnwdkjWdsb2JhbACCIZQFAQEBAQkJCgkPBrNihA8G X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.39,325,1235948400"; d="scan'208";a="25651650" Received: from relay.pcl-ipout02.plus.net ([212.159.7.100]) by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-SHA; 05 Apr 2009 04:49:12 +0200 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AiIFAIK410nUnw4R/2dsb2JhbACCIcghhA8G Received: from pih-relay04.plus.net ([212.159.14.17]) by relay.pcl-ipout02.plus.net with ESMTP; 05 Apr 2009 03:49:11 +0100 Received: from [87.112.64.35] (helo=leper.local) by pih-relay04.plus.net with esmtp (Exim) id 1LqIQ3-0006MZ-J2 for caml-list@yquem.inria.fr; Sun, 05 Apr 2009 03:49:11 +0100 From: Jon Harrop Organization: Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Strings Date: Sun, 5 Apr 2009 03:55:31 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.9 References: <200904031256.33357.jon@ffconsultancy.com> <87ocvc6qa1.fsf@frosties.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <87ocvc6qa1.fsf@frosties.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200904050355.31170.jon@ffconsultancy.com> X-Plusnet-Relay: 3d1f3173f953fbff3b11c9feabb3214b X-Spam: no; 0.00; ocaml:01 ocaml:01 ugliness:01 substrings:01 2009:98 frog:98 char:01 char:01 wrote:01 caml-list:01 strings:01 strings:01 string:02 string:02 bytes:03 On Saturday 04 April 2009 22:51:50 Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > The beauty of ocaml strings is that they are really compact. An ocaml > string on 32bit is 5-8 bytes longer than the contained string and 9-16 > bytes on 64bit. The ugliness is that 16Mb limit. I assume those limits have been removed in batteries?! > As for char lists for strings you can always convert strings to char > lists when that is a better representation. I would rather use a view pattern to create substrings efficiently. -- Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e