From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E86CBC8E for ; Tue, 15 Feb 2005 20:20:12 +0100 (CET) Received: from mailout02.sul.t-online.com (mailout02.sul.t-online.com [194.25.134.17]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id j1FJKBLp001983 for ; Tue, 15 Feb 2005 20:20:11 +0100 Received: from fwd04.aul.t-online.de by mailout02.sul.t-online.com with smtp id 1D18F1-0003te-02; Tue, 15 Feb 2005 20:20:11 +0100 Received: from [217.82.237.216] (Xd2Dd2ZEge5TUPrZpexTA+5lloojl99ZwFeJV5EvmMvZh7dYKxCdsa@[217.82.237.216]) by fwd04.sul.t-online.com with esmtp id 1D18Eg-0whOHw0; Tue, 15 Feb 2005 20:19:50 +0100 Message-ID: <42124B55.1090800@t-online.de> Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 20:19:49 +0100 From: Christian Szegedy User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (X11/20050131) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Memory allocation nano-benchmark. References: <420B7A7E.90504@or.uni-bonn.de> <005101c50f7f$6db0e560$d54380d9@mshome.net> <1108048745.16698.101.camel@pelican.wigram> <014801c50f8e$a08e9a40$d54380d9@mshome.net> <015f01c50f99$e8a57e60$d54380d9@mshome.net> <420BBC7D.5070103@t-online.de> <002401c5101b$4130b640$a2f40b50@mshome.net> <1108127068.16698.320.camel@pelican.wigram> <20050211210729.GA466@first.in-berlin.de> <1108169091.3474.16.camel@pelican.wigram> <000c01c51369$278441c0$0100a8c0@mshome.net> In-Reply-To: <000c01c51369$278441c0$0100a8c0@mshome.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-ID: Xd2Dd2ZEge5TUPrZpexTA+5lloojl99ZwFeJV5EvmMvZh7dYKxCdsa X-TOI-MSGID: 75250380-941c-4923-9c6f-70a8a9329939 X-Miltered: at nez-perce with ID 42124B6B.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 gava:01 wrote:01 -unsafe:01 ocamlopt:01 arrays:01 -unsafe:01 compilation:01 ...:98 frederic:03 memory:08 postings:08 previous:09 stupid:09 question:11 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 (2004-11-16) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled version=3.0.2 X-Spam-Level: Frédéric Gava wrote: >Hi, > >stupid question, do you use the "-unsafe" option of ocamlopt. It is better >for arrays... > I used -unsafe. (You could have seen it in my previous postings: the compilation line was there.)