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 QAA00504; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 16:55:29 +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 QAA32675 for ; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 16:55:28 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from grisu.bik-gmbh.de (grisu.bik-gmbh.de [217.110.154.194]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i7CEtPmL018258 for ; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 16:55:27 +0200 Received: from [192.168.125.193] ([192.168.125.193]) by grisu.bik-gmbh.de (8.12.8p2/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i7CEtJ1w037585; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 16:55:19 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from hars@bik-gmbh.de) Message-ID: <411B84D2.7050705@bik-gmbh.de> Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 16:55:14 +0200 From: Florian Hars User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.7) Gecko/20040616 X-Accept-Language: de, de-de, en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Bauer, Christoph" CC: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] The tag bit References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,REFERENCES, REPLY_WITH_QUOTES,USER_AGENT_MOZILLA_UA,X_ACCEPT_LANG version=2.55 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.55 (1.174.2.19-2003-05-19-exp) X-Miltered: at nez-perce with ID 411B84DD.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Loop: caml-list@inria.fr X-Spam: no; 0.00; florian:01 hars:01 hars:01 bik-gmbh:01 caml-list:01 bauer:01 pointers:01 florian:01 compiler:01 ints:01 byte:01 byte:01 int:01 bytes:02 wrote:03 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk Bauer, Christoph wrote: > Isn't it possible to divide the memory in blocks of 33 (65 on 64 bit > machines) Words and the first Word contains all the tag bits? Good idea, but lets go the whole way: I always thougth the decision to have eight bits to a byte instead of nine most unfortunate. Why don't we just add a bit to all our bytes, we could express so much more per byte? Just imagine the possibilities in I18N: UTF-18 would need considerably less plane shifting that UTF-16. (On a more serious note: You propose to turn the tag bit into a tag long word, requiring two memory acesses instead of one and blowing up the storage requriments for ints and pointers by a factor of two, which will slow down about everything. You can get more or less the same effects now without any change to the compiler by using Int32.) Yours, Florian. ------------------- 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