From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <weis@pauillac.inria.fr>
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 A038DBB84
	for <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>; Tue, 11 Jul 2006 16:10:42 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from pauillac.inria.fr (pauillac.inria.fr [128.93.11.35])
	by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k6BEAguV018040
	for <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>; Tue, 11 Jul 2006 16:10:42 +0200
Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id QAA11150 for <caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr>; Tue, 11 Jul 2006 16:10:41 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from py-out-1112.google.com (py-out-1112.google.com [64.233.166.180])
	by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k6BEAdlk018025
	for <caml-list@inria.fr>; Tue, 11 Jul 2006 16:10:41 +0200
Received: by py-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id b29so3997598pya
        for <caml-list@inria.fr>; Tue, 11 Jul 2006 07:10:39 -0700 (PDT)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
        s=beta; d=gmail.com;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition;
        b=Nm9VQyZLnnYKFIv4VUKGLg4WPfuzdh9Nch/Kk3OK0mikmHwp8lWEzbm0kvC4na8QwmspJcrD59hFtu08I4DP0RV9h5ahxv8njH7eQDXrLDIA7itNX7L4r3fHiCfKNKjatNNFi7hQkU4Udl07/FokdFgZb97XXS1cOMmEMeHnciQ=
Received: by 10.35.63.2 with SMTP id q2mr6652163pyk;
        Tue, 11 Jul 2006 07:10:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.35.20.11 with HTTP; Tue, 11 Jul 2006 07:10:38 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <875c7e070607110710k2ca8d548i7f9d8e22d801df8e@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2006 10:10:38 -0400
From: "Chris King" <colanderman@gmail.com>
To: "O'Caml Mailing List" <caml-list@inria.fr>
Subject: Performance of immediate objects
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 44B3B15F.001 on concorde : j-chkmail score : X : 0/20 1
X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 44B3B162.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)!
X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 44B3B15F.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)!
X-Spam: no; 0.00; foo:01 val:01 foo:01 val:01 slower:01 int:01 int:01 objects:02 objects:02 let:03 let:03 compiled:04 chris:05 chris:05 table:93 
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.3 (2005-04-27) on yquem.inria.fr
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_BY_IP autolearn=disabled 
	version=3.0.3

Is there a substantial difference to the way in which

class foo (i:int) = object
 val v = i
 method bar = v
end

let mk_foo i = new foo i

and

let mk_foo (i:int) = object
 val v = i
 method bar = v
end

are compiled?  I've run a couple tests with the above and immediate
objects seem to be about 15% slower than classes.  Is this because a
new method table is created for the immediate object every time or is
that the case for classes also?

- Chris King