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 NAA17072; Thu, 8 Jul 2004 13:04:26 +0200 (MET DST) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id NAA16899 for ; Thu, 8 Jul 2004 13:04:26 +0200 (MET DST) X-SPAM-Warning: Sending machine is listed in blackholes.five-ten-sg.com Received: from thomas.numericable.net (thomas.numericable.net [80.236.0.149]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i68B4PSH006134 for ; Thu, 8 Jul 2004 13:04:25 +0200 Received: (qmail 22360 invoked from network); 8 Jul 2004 11:04:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO laposte.net) ([81.220.100.229]) (envelope-sender ) by thomas.numericable.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 8 Jul 2004 11:04:23 -0000 Message-ID: <40ED2AB7.4000506@laposte.net> Date: Thu, 08 Jul 2004 13:06:31 +0200 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Olivier_P=E9r=E8s?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040206 X-Accept-Language: br, fr-fr, fr, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Does Caml have slow arithmetics ? References: <20040707130016.GA27591@bourg.inria.fr> <40EC122C.3040300@laposte.net> <20040707170611.GA24565@davidb.org> <40EC3631.5010905@laposte.net> <20040708034059.GA29942@davidb.org> In-Reply-To: <20040708034059.GA29942@davidb.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 40ED2A39.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Loop: caml-list@inria.fr X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 arithmetics:01 aligned:01 pointers:01 pointers:01 aligned:01 seldom:01 ocaml:01 caml:01 caml:01 distinguish:01 olivier:02 olivier:02 pointer:03 heap:03 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk David Brown wrote: > No. Aligned C pointers look like pointers to the GC. It uses a bitmap > to distinguish between C pointers and ocaml heap managed pointers. > Misaligned pointers are the ones that will look like integers to the GC. Once again, you are not talking about the same thing as I am. In the suggested new system, aligned C pointers would look like (0-tagged) Caml integers and thus the GC would not even consider collecting them, which is good. However, the check whether a (1-tagged) pointer was allocated by Caml would remain necessary, because C pointers can have their LSB set, even if it is seldom so. Therefore I wonder whether this would be useful at all. It was not my intention to say this three times, so I'm stopping there so as not to pollute the list. Olivier. ------------------- 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