Don't quote me on this, but I believe that marshal uses a string in bytecode
with threads, uses straight malloc with bytecode and no threads, and never
uses strings in native code.  I'm /very/ unsure about that last one, but I
am pretty confident that in some cases, whether it uses strings depends on
whether threads are involved.

y

On 1/17/07, Sebastien Ferre <ferre@irisa.fr> wrote:
>
>
> Daniel Bünzli wrote:
>
> >> pourtant, je passe bien par un appel a output_value
> >> dans un fichier, sans passer par une chaine intermediaire.
> >
> > Maybe output_value uses a string internally. Try with a bytecode
> > version of your executable, an exception should be raised (or have a
> > look at the implementaiton of output_value).
>
> I used a bytecode version.
>
> I checked the code of output_value, and it uses an internal
> string. So it won't work.
>
> Anyway, I knew I would have to go for a more serious
> solution as soon as data get really large. I think of
> using something like GDBM.
>
> Thanks for the help.
> Sebastien
>
> _______________________________________________
> Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management:
> http://yquem.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/caml-list
> Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
> Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners
> Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs
>