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=1.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,DNS_FROM_SECURITYSAGE autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 943D7BB84 for ; Sun, 26 Oct 2008 20:49:02 +0100 (CET) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AjoAAMdmBElCbwQbi2dsb2JhbACTegEBAQoLCgcPBqsTg08 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.33,489,1220220000"; d="scan'208";a="18532441" Received: from out3.smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.27]) by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 26 Oct 2008 20:49:02 +0100 Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.internal [10.202.2.41]) by out1.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2870183851; Sun, 26 Oct 2008 15:49:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from heartbeat2.messagingengine.com ([10.202.2.161]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Sun, 26 Oct 2008 15:49:00 -0400 X-Sasl-enc: +wY6IL5JzRzFXktM0XgsQ4B88Y20XZr6gbXdy+l/K0tz 1225050540 Received: from [192.168.1.10] (ALyon-157-1-83-127.w90-37.abo.wanadoo.fr [90.37.194.127]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0B13830D50; Sun, 26 Oct 2008 15:48:59 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4904C7EC.7000508@ens-lyon.org> Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2008 20:41:32 +0100 From: Martin Jambon User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (X11/20081008) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Daniel_B=FCnzli?= Cc: caml-list caml-list Subject: Re: Indentation (was Re: [Caml-list] What does Jane Street use/want for an IDE? What about you?) References: <200810200919.41561.ober.14@osu.edu> <9d3ec8300810211231j40dbbef2ifdd6c2f6b84a2048@mail.gmail.com> <20081021202649.GA11380@philou.ch> <200810220842.17128.ober.14@osu.edu> <49002C0E.5050107@inescporto.pt> <49003554.9050109@lri.fr> <9722eaea0810230313u25b2c874xc94574786e513162@mail.gmail.com> <4900596C.80406@inescporto.pt> <20081023141335.GA521@snarc.org> <49008D7D.4060908@lri.fr> <490096B8.3020602@ramenlabs.com> <4902F183.5060504@doomeer.com> <4903145E.5050904@ens-lyon.org> <483673C5-ED3C-4877-AC85-D89E1CA6A1D2@erratique.ch> <4903A6F0.5000303@ens-lyon.org> <093FC693-92FB-4C62-82DF-4FAD8F5E4D65@erratique.ch> In-Reply-To: <093FC693-92FB-4C62-82DF-4FAD8F5E4D65@erratique.ch> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam: no; 0.00; ens-lyon:01 bunzli:01 afaik:01 closures:01 wrote:01 clearer:01 naming:01 naming:01 caml-list:01 functions:01 imperative:01 jambon:01 jambon:01 closure:01 let:03 Daniel Bünzli wrote: > > Le 26 oct. 08 à 01:08, Martin Jambon a écrit : > >> In performance-critical code or maybe imperative code in general, it >> feels good to control when closures are created. In such cases, avoiding >> local functions helps. > > Just to be clear, naming your anonymous function locally (which is what > is recommended) or not naming it doesn't make any performance difference > AFAIK. What I mean is that: let f x y = x + y let g x l = List.map (f x) l is clearer than: let g x l = let f y = x + y in List.map f l in the sense that it is obvious that a closure is created in the first case, while it is less visible in the second case. Martin -- http://mjambon.com/