From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <jon@ffconsultancy.com>
X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr
Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr
Received: from mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.82])
	by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 930E8BBAF
	for <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>; Wed, 16 Dec 2009 00:25:57 +0100 (CET)
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AjoBAE+qJ0vUnwdkkGdsb2JhbACCGpksAQEBAQkJDAcTBLwNgiyBfwQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.47,402,1257116400"; 
   d="scan'208";a="42086011"
Received: from relay.pcl-ipout02.plus.net ([212.159.7.100])
  by mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-SHA; 16 Dec 2009 00:25:57 +0100
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AtUEAE+qJ0vUnw4U/2dsb2JhbACCGtV5giyBfwQ
Received: from pih-relay08.plus.net ([212.159.14.20])
  by relay.pcl-ipout02.plus.net with ESMTP; 15 Dec 2009 23:25:56 +0000
Received: from [87.115.28.196] (helo=leper.local)
	 by pih-relay08.plus.net with esmtp (Exim) id 1NKgmC-0005HC-KE
	for caml-list@yquem.inria.fr; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 23:25:56 +0000
From: Jon Harrop <jon@ffconsultancy.com>
Organization: Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] How to write a CUDA kernel in ocaml?
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 00:39:50 +0000
User-Agent: KMail/1.9.9
References: <320e992a0912150737t483a5946x9cad351fc344691f@mail.gmail.com> <4B27B981.80700@starynkevitch.net> <017101ca7ddc$fb936b20$f2ba4160$@allsopp@metastack.com>
In-Reply-To: <017101ca7ddc$fb936b20$f2ba4160$@allsopp@metastack.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200912160039.51086.jon@ffconsultancy.com>
X-Plusnet-Relay: 8f9b9deff0d7ae3a7bcb73892a38a117
X-Spam: no; 0.00; ocaml:01 basile:01 eray:01 ozkural:01 ocaml:01 recursive:01 recursion:01 recursive:01 recursion:01 translating:01 2009:98 frog:98 wrote:01 wrote:01 compilers:01 

On Tuesday 15 December 2009 23:18:57 David Allsopp wrote:
> Basile Starynkevitch wrote:
> > Eray Ozkural wrote:
> >
> > Compiling Ocaml to efficient C is not easy and probably impossible (or
> > extremely difficult) in the general case. In
> > particular, tail recursive calls are essential in Ocaml, and are not
> > available in C in most compilers.
>
> What's this based on (out of interest)? Most C compilers don't necessarily
> identify tail recursion in *C* code but if you're emitting C as an OCaml
> backend then there's no reason not to convert tail recursive *OCaml*
> functions to C code based on goto or similar looping constructs (yes, you'd
> almost-always-virtually-never use goto in a hand-crafted C program without
> apologising profusely at Dijkstra's grave but if you're using C as an
> intermediate language then that's a different matter). If I recall
> correctly from an old post on this list, this is how Felix handles tail
> recursion when translating Felix to C++

And trampolines to eliminate tail calls that cannot be eliminated using goto. 
However, trampolines are ~10x slower than TCO in the code gen.

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