From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <oliver@first.in-berlin.de>
X-Original-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr
Delivered-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr
Received: from mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.105])
	by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 32F3E7ED7A
	for <caml-list@sympa.inria.fr>; Sun, 26 Aug 2012 21:10:23 +0200 (CEST)
Received-SPF: None (mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  oliver@first.in-berlin.de) identity=pra;
  client-ip=192.109.42.8;
  receiver=mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="oliver@first.in-berlin.de";
  x-sender="oliver@first.in-berlin.de";
  x-conformance=sidf_compatible
Received-SPF: None (mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  oliver@first.in-berlin.de) identity=mailfrom;
  client-ip=192.109.42.8;
  receiver=mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="oliver@first.in-berlin.de";
  x-sender="oliver@first.in-berlin.de";
  x-conformance=sidf_compatible
Received-SPF: None (mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  postmaster@einhorn.in-berlin.de) identity=helo;
  client-ip=192.109.42.8;
  receiver=mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="oliver@first.in-berlin.de";
  x-sender="postmaster@einhorn.in-berlin.de";
  x-conformance=sidf_compatible
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApcCAIpzOlDAbSoIe2dsb2JhbABEhgO0aCIBARYmBCOCIQEFI1YQCwkRAiYCAhQYMYggBKhukhgUgQ2JZ4V/MmADjXSHYJJ7
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.80,316,1344204000"; 
   d="scan'208";a="153857923"
Received: from einhorn.in-berlin.de ([192.109.42.8])
  by mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 26 Aug 2012 21:10:22 +0200
X-Envelope-From: oliver@first.in-berlin.de
Received: from first (e178029129.adsl.alicedsl.de [85.178.29.129])
	(authenticated bits=0)
	by einhorn.in-berlin.de (8.13.6/8.13.6/Debian-1) with ESMTP id q7QJAKVG007769
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT);
	Sun, 26 Aug 2012 21:10:20 +0200
Received: by first (Postfix, from userid 1000)
	id 22B7C1540663; Sun, 26 Aug 2012 21:10:20 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2012 21:10:20 +0200
From: oliver <oliver@first.in-berlin.de>
To: Gabriel Scherer <gabriel.scherer@gmail.com>
Cc: Hongbo Zhang <bobzhang1988@gmail.com>, Caml List <caml-list@inria.fr>
Message-ID: <20120826191020.GB1908@siouxsie>
References: <503A30A7.3030707@gmail.com>
 <CAPFanBFtypXBgv-vOZjPfk0hKeXnLJddkw0aKRNX6YV_3Uu2nA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAPFanBFtypXBgv-vOZjPfk0hKeXnLJddkw0aKRNX6YV_3Uu2nA@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang_at_IN-Berlin_e.V. on 192.109.42.8
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] How to profile compiler's performance

On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 05:05:55PM +0200, Gabriel Scherer wrote:
[...]
> (Of course using the natively-compiled versions of your compilers will also
> speed up performance, but if your generated code hits one of the source of
> exponential behavior of the compiler you're out of luck anyway.)
[...]

Which are the sources of this behaviour?

Is this documented somewhere?


Ciao,
   Oliver