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=1.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,SPF_NEUTRAL 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 F0FCCBC69 for ; Thu, 3 May 2007 22:37:37 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com (ug-out-1314.google.com [66.249.92.170]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id l43Kbbn1014285 for ; Thu, 3 May 2007 22:37:37 +0200 Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id k3so460001ugf for ; Thu, 03 May 2007 13:37:37 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:message-id:cc:content-transfer-encoding:from:subject:date:to:x-mailer; b=aj4wA6aBZWjiFBOD7ylO+fxuxLYaQDZr7xE2aKQ8RY9TzF43UliVv0lXqhbTDBzyBiCK53uxTkYUtrZ/IWzb9a0aEzg2I6NltjUbYR/sHvWakiRy+adgfAuEH3fSWT6j8C7tY1unChKoiqYQ0d08X94H5G10vNBDbcTQZFFKEiM= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:message-id:cc:content-transfer-encoding:from:subject:date:to:x-mailer; b=YM+PEHkVsgbPPMVMAG+detndXJs1ys7kPcMudg/+EWmULUEEGxfcJ0LJRPdbJRfdTPeYRDvuBLQKz9dWL6kVW2xzAvEyQk+lLU4u/XCM9NbqYIN93/kGXU58kstEqrG+IQS1tW+QGxBVH4JYfcdkY5W2aa66RGfN+xn78TgWzIY= Received: by 10.82.180.17 with SMTP id c17mr4718141buf.1178224654156; Thu, 03 May 2007 13:37:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?192.168.1.34? ( [83.52.237.136]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id b36sm476510ika.2007.05.03.13.37.31; Thu, 03 May 2007 13:37:32 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20070503202932.GB12369@nyc-qws-003.delacy.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.3) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: <5885F0FA-0125-4B35-BB94-8D15CCDBC502@gmail.com> Cc: OCaml Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Joel Reymont Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Inlining and code placement Date: Thu, 3 May 2007 21:37:31 +0100 To: "Markus Mottl" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.3) X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 463A4811.000 on concorde : j-chkmail score : XXX : 5/20 1 0.000 -> 3 X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 463A4811.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail . ensmp . fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; inlining:01 markus:01 markus:01 mottl:01 inlining:01 2007,:98 wrote:01 wrote:01 caml-list:01 strong:96 seems:03 differences:05 elaborate:06 likely:08 majority:89 Markus, Do you care to elaborate? Thanks, Joel On May 3, 2007, at 9:31 PM, Markus Mottl wrote: > On 5/3/07, mmottl@janestcapital.com wrote: >> concerning my email about inlining from a few days ago: it seems that >> the majority of differences is not so much due to the inlining >> level but >> due to code placement. This means that playing with the inlining >> level >> beyond some reasonable, small value is likely to not have any strong >> impact on the performance of the program. -- http://wagerlabs.com/