From: Alain Frisch <alain.frisch@lexifi.com>
To: Mark Shinwell <mshinwell@janestreet.com>,
Gerd Stolpmann <info@gerd-stolpmann.de>
Cc: Pierre Chambart <pierre.chambart@laposte.net>,
Markus Mottl <markus.mottl@gmail.com>,
OCaml List <caml-list@inria.fr>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] <DKIM> Re: Status of Flambda in OCaml 4.03
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2016 10:09:51 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56E28B5F.2030002@lexifi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAM3Ki76Fe-A2+nxaZeZt3rQ8P3m-wh9FmAsyoQ2Qp7WedUcoRA@mail.gmail.com>
On 11/03/2016 09:59, Mark Shinwell wrote:
> Also, for a function like the one you gave containing:
>
> if <cond> then <small expr> else <big expr>
>
> one of the reasons this should be kept in the .cmx files is because,
> when the compiler comes to examine whether to inline it, it may be
> able to fully evaluate <cond>. In particular when it's true then the
> large expression can be eliminated completely (so long as <cond> is
> not side-effecting). Another example is functions containing a large
> match, where we may end up knowing which case is to be taken.
For such cases, it is interesting to compile the function as a small
stub that checks the condition or the match and jumps (tail call) into
the proper sub-body. Only the stub (and potentially small enough
sub-bodies) would be inlined, and the cmx would not need to store the
large sub-bodies. Such approach was already taken for optional
arguments, and I think that flambda already generalizes it. Would the
case above be treated like that?
Alain
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-03-11 9:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-03-08 22:10 [Caml-list] " Markus Mottl
2016-03-08 22:53 ` Alain Frisch
2016-03-09 3:55 ` Markus Mottl
2016-03-09 7:14 ` Mark Shinwell
2016-03-10 0:59 ` Markus Mottl
2016-03-10 1:32 ` Yotam Barnoy
2016-03-10 1:43 ` Markus Mottl
2016-03-10 7:20 ` Mark Shinwell
2016-03-10 15:32 ` Markus Mottl
2016-03-10 15:49 ` Gabriel Scherer
2016-04-17 8:43 ` Jesper Louis Andersen
2016-04-17 8:59 ` Mohamed Iguernlala
2016-04-17 15:43 ` Markus Mottl
2016-03-10 20:12 ` [Caml-list] <DKIM> " Pierre Chambart
2016-03-10 21:08 ` Markus Mottl
2016-03-10 22:51 ` Gerd Stolpmann
2016-03-11 8:59 ` Mark Shinwell
2016-03-11 9:05 ` Mark Shinwell
2016-03-11 9:09 ` Alain Frisch [this message]
2016-03-11 9:26 ` Mark Shinwell
2016-03-11 14:48 ` Yotam Barnoy
2016-03-11 15:09 ` Jesper Louis Andersen
2016-03-11 16:58 ` Markus Mottl
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=56E28B5F.2030002@lexifi.com \
--to=alain.frisch@lexifi.com \
--cc=caml-list@inria.fr \
--cc=info@gerd-stolpmann.de \
--cc=markus.mottl@gmail.com \
--cc=mshinwell@janestreet.com \
--cc=pierre.chambart@laposte.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).