From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id XAA07682; Mon, 14 Oct 2002 23:50:07 +0200 (MET DST) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id XAA07522 for ; Mon, 14 Oct 2002 23:50:06 +0200 (MET DST) X-SPAM-Warning: Sending machine is listed in blackholes.five-ten-sg.com Received: from athlon.baretta.com ([62.211.4.105]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id g9ELo5D10851 for ; Mon, 14 Oct 2002 23:50:05 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from baretta.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by athlon.baretta.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D342D27250; Tue, 15 Oct 2002 00:00:34 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <3DAB3E82.6050600@baretta.com> Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2002 00:00:34 +0200 From: Alessandro Baretta Organization: Baretta srl -- www.baretta.com User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.1) Gecko/20020826 X-Accept-Language: it, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Frederic Tronel , Ocaml Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Problem with ocamlc and recursive and parametrized classes References: <3DAAA035.6020809@inrialpes.fr> <3DAAA5BF.9010901@inrialpes.fr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk Frederic Tronel wrote: > Frederic Tronel wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I'm using ocaml version 3.06 for a industrial project. > > I'm facing a well-known problem I think, that is related to > > the use of recursive and parametrized classes. > > Actually, adding a single line of code in one of my class generates > > a hang up in the compilation process. The incriminated code is much too > > long to be posted on the list, and I'm not able to reproduce the > > phenomenon on smallest examples. But basically ocamlc seems to run in an > > long loop consuming more and more memory. After two or three minutes and > > more than 150Mo consumed, I stop the process. > > Should I try to insist (is there any warranty on the finiteness of the > > compilation ?), Yes and no. Yes if the compiler is correct, but occasionally a bug might slip in, and cause the compiler to loop endlessly. > Sorry for the previous post. Is there any plan to improve the behaviour > of the compiler in the future ? (if possible of course). I don't want to sound flamish, but I really don't think this question is appropriate on this mailing list. Best wishes for your O'Caml project. Alex ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners