From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: 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 9017ABBAF for ; Sun, 7 Mar 2010 15:07:40 +0100 (CET) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AhUDAJdBk0vRVdzgi2dsb2JhbACRI4IQiAkIFQEBAQoLCgcRBR+na4FhhAstiEkBAQMFCIRrBA X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,597,1262559600"; d="scan'208";a="46114181" Received: from mail-fx0-f224.google.com ([209.85.220.224]) by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 07 Mar 2010 15:07:40 +0100 Received: by fxm24 with SMTP id 24so2559407fxm.17 for ; Sun, 07 Mar 2010 06:07:40 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:date:from:to:cc:subject :message-id:in-reply-to:references:x-mailer:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=a36+sXRUSV5fv/pcpnkKmvBtKr3xTrGsP0lp8Eiu1iw=; b=jPS//S8Y+GrSfPKIw/VChAAM/+Lv4p4xbyu+vj6rWk8wcVsM8b4FGrPZA6JSAFCx9r wNxxFrJ5CLu/TP0+2k0ay3mYgcY9p1IAEyShmff7yfh60MyAR52E2S5Eo3OflNDNRGvK ByI6KJAM+DCGTAolt3+DjLn4u0qx4e5v4hnnQ= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:x-mailer :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=gs2zixh00cxZhkoYpJbyWPIDc0B+tA/eFpXPWhW3xQ53Yy4sWNtOcQugFzjyaMzlfr YwW+Wvbwen+4NVUXW5SpklieDqT228t1GbdG5FmTd+DbKMvxBIc24GrYsc6UuzZ2ejzy t/t8lJMyUTh4/gEHmeSVhbOd8SvZ1GH87spvY= Received: by 10.103.81.12 with SMTP id i12mr2313949mul.89.1267970859941; Sun, 07 Mar 2010 06:07:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from lemon (8-115-132-95.pool.ukrtel.net [95.132.115.8]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id y37sm1718246mug.22.2010.03.07.06.07.36 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Sun, 07 Mar 2010 06:07:37 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2010 16:07:36 +0200 From: ygrek To: Goswin von Brederlow Cc: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] no_scan_tag and int array Message-Id: <20100307160736.9a407839.ygrekheretix@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <87eijxot1o.fsf@frosties.localdomain> References: <20100306112645.a74bb0c4.ygrekheretix@gmail.com> <87eijxot1o.fsf@frosties.localdomain> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.5.0 (GTK+ 2.12.12; i486-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam: no; 0.00; iter:01 arrays:01 polymorphic:01 wrote:01 caml-list:01 int:01 referenced:02 float:03 float:03 correctly:04 scan:06 scan:06 trick:06 function:08 looks:08 On Sun, 07 Mar 2010 01:48:51 +0100 Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > What polymorphic array function? I don't think Array.length is a good > test as it looks at the header of the array to see how many words the > array has. Sure, I've tested this elsewhere with Array.iter and other. Array.length here is just to keep the array alive. > > GC correctly reclaims array memory when it is not referenced anymore. > > Apparantly this trick is not allowed for float array as they have a special tag set. > > But does the GC scan float arrays? No. -- ygrek http://ygrek.org.ua