From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1ED10BB83 for ; Wed, 13 Sep 2006 19:40:52 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp4-g19.free.fr (smtp4-g19.free.fr [212.27.42.30]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k8DHepcT003225 for ; Wed, 13 Sep 2006 19:40:51 +0200 Received: from [192.168.1.2] (che78-2-82-237-71-191.fbx.proxad.net [82.237.71.191]) by smtp4-g19.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BD4954E6F; Wed, 13 Sep 2006 19:40:50 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <45084293.8010609@inria.fr> Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2006 19:40:35 +0200 From: Xavier Leroy User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (X11/20050317) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jacques Garrigue Cc: trevor@research.att.com, caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] effect of -thread with ocamlc/ocamlopt -c References: <4506E954.8080207@research.att.com> <45081CC0.8010004@research.att.com> <20060914.013432.41630933.garrigue@math.nagoya-u.ac.jp> In-Reply-To: <20060914.013432.41630933.garrigue@math.nagoya-u.ac.jp> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.91.0.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 450842A3.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; -thread:01 ocamlc:01 ocamlopt:01 threads:01 ocamlc:01 -thread:01 threads:01 bytecode:01 wrote:01 caml-list:01 interfaces:01 interfaces:01 modules:02 modules:02 garrigue:03 Jacques Garrigue wrote: > The question is a bit different depending on whether you use system > threads or vmthreads. [...] Jacques' explanation is correct: there was a time when the requirement listed in the manual ("all modules of a multithreaded program must be compiled with ocamlc -thread ") made sense, because some standard library modules had different *interfaces* between the non-threaded and threaded versions. This is no longer the case: with system threads, those modules have the same interfaces and the same implementations, and even with bytecode threads they have different implementations but identical interfaces. So, you can safely ignore this sentence in the manual. The manual will be updated for the next major release. - Xavier Leroy