From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Original-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104]) by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 386CD7ED1D for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 10:33:48 +0200 (CEST) IronPort-PHdr: 9a23:dLPljBwxsdhXWfXXCy+O+j09IxM/srCxBDY+r6Qd0eMUIJqq85mqBkHD//Il1AaPBtWHraIZw8Pt8IneGkU4qa6bt34DdJEeHzQksu4x2zIaPcieFEfgJ+TrZSFpVO5LVVti4m3peRMNQJW2WVTerzWI4CIIHV2nbEwudrizStOapv/0/t7x0qWbWx9Piju5bOE6BzSNhiKViPMrh5B/IL060BrDrygAUe1XwWR1OQDbxE6ktY+YtaRu+CVIuv8n69UIEeCjJ/x5HvRkC2EJOmov5cDv/SLITQaV62FUBmofmABJDgyD9xr6U438qAP1s+N83G+ROsigHp4uXjH3zKptThL0iG8uOzc8uETWjsh9luoPox+noRFjw4fYaYSQNf56c7n1ctYTRG4HVcFUAX8SSrigZpcCWrJSdd1TqJPw8h5X9UOz Authentication-Results: mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; spf=None smtp.pra=kennethadammiller@gmail.com; spf=Pass smtp.mailfrom=kennethadammiller@gmail.com; spf=None smtp.helo=postmaster@mail-yk0-f175.google.com Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of kennethadammiller@gmail.com) identity=pra; client-ip=209.85.160.175; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="kennethadammiller@gmail.com"; x-sender="kennethadammiller@gmail.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: Pass (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: domain of kennethadammiller@gmail.com designates 209.85.160.175 as permitted sender) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=209.85.160.175; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="kennethadammiller@gmail.com"; x-sender="kennethadammiller@gmail.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible; x-record-type="v=spf1" Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of postmaster@mail-yk0-f175.google.com) identity=helo; client-ip=209.85.160.175; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="kennethadammiller@gmail.com"; x-sender="postmaster@mail-yk0-f175.google.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0CDAQBaEh5Wm6+gVdFehFkPBr9kgxOCCn8CgS0HPBABAQEBAQEBARABAQEBAQYLCwkhLoIfggcBAQEDARIRHQEbEQwBAwELBgULDSoCAiEBAREBBQEcBhMUDod2AQMKCKE2gTE+MYtJgWyCeYkMChknDVaENAEBAQEBAQEDAQEBAQEBARUBBQ6GaYN3gQaCUIFuTweCaYFFBZYViyeBdIFYkmmDWoIjEiOBFziCLyOBdyIzhm8BAQE X-IPAS-Result: A0CDAQBaEh5Wm6+gVdFehFkPBr9kgxOCCn8CgS0HPBABAQEBAQEBARABAQEBAQYLCwkhLoIfggcBAQEDARIRHQEbEQwBAwELBgULDSoCAiEBAREBBQEcBhMUDod2AQMKCKE2gTE+MYtJgWyCeYkMChknDVaENAEBAQEBAQEDAQEBAQEBARUBBQ6GaYN3gQaCUIFuTweCaYFFBZYViyeBdIFYkmmDWoIjEiOBFziCLyOBdyIzhm8BAQE X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.17,681,1437429600"; d="scan'208";a="150491098" Received: from mail-yk0-f175.google.com ([209.85.160.175]) by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/AES128-GCM-SHA256; 14 Oct 2015 10:33:46 +0200 Received: by ykfy204 with SMTP id y204so18004987ykf.1 for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 01:33:45 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=Xpkiq/SwRY7jL+jJlwdbHLqiNV1jb+G3q6PACxor2nc=; b=La7dWfecl54Y5JUT7tggqcNSTaiRUc4mymStiOzzmhled7aCdgYrFeUByuJa+rmT1B mcmWPLa4XH6qn1AlyY9e3Wm/UdJHwUCIVeVspONrHJzKbopCbbQj3miEjyWyQifFzgVc kztdePPy4TNo/VlSxvHcu5fGuct51any06APUg47/Kg28rBIqaJY6kpyjH1mktJrvHyx RSEQZu2yqpKssMVs1uluMxQQjubo5zca71zzDzmcn9z9vfAJWoyjk0EzYM9asL75KIx1 9h0Yb/2nec18loSXz+ILzf4manohil6jFneWdp2HOLboytBL+zypCKXFGM6uX4itRAC1 rQyw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.13.192.66 with SMTP id b63mr1240667ywd.80.1444811625665; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 01:33:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.37.65.143 with HTTP; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 01:33:45 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 04:33:45 -0400 Message-ID: From: Kenneth Adam Miller To: Gabriel Scherer Cc: caml users Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a114e650eb71fd405220c6baa Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Automated Instrumentation for Profiling --001a114e650eb71fd405220c6baa Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Oh wait! There's a source rewriter that myself literally used just two days ago that can eliminate camlp4 instances in favor of ppx. Lol, I should have remembered this *facepalm*. Yeah, so the complexity of such an undertaking just dropped significantly in my perception On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 4:25 AM, Kenneth Adam Miller < kennethadammiller@gmail.com> wrote: > That sounds like it would definitely be a good benefit to the community > and I'd be really happy to do it. I know that ppx is the successor to > camlp4, and I have a mind to teach myself the sort of magic where I can > annotate a type with some code generating function because I appreciate the > power. > > But right now, my extra curricular work is just ridiculously over loaded. > In my free time I'm teaching myself Coq, compiler construction with llvm, > taking a coursera course working on a shingled disassembler, working on an > ocamljava backend for ctypes and a ocaml link to CZMQ. I love what I do - > coding and learning all day long - but I have human limits, and I just > don't think I would be able to pick it up for probably 6-8 months. Possibly > something else will come along before then, whether that be even more > compelling challenges or that ocamlviz is seconded by something better. > > So, I really honestly would, but I don't think I can. :( > > On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 4:11 AM, Gabriel Scherer < > gabriel.scherer@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Have you considered porting ocamlviz to ppx? >> >> On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 9:44 AM, Kenneth Adam Miller >> wrote: >> > So, I'm looking to do some performance profiling of some libraries and >> > tools. I would like some tools that are more language facilitated than >> an >> > alternative of using something like oprofile because while oprofile is >> good, >> > you can only guess at what is consuming the most time in your actual >> ocaml >> > source because all the function names have been lost by that time. >> > >> > I found ocamlviz, and that seems pretty good, but I'm looking for >> something >> > else because we plan to move away from using camlp4 toward ppx. >> Introducing >> > this will mean an additional hurdle to overcome once the transition is >> > complete in terms of customizing the build chain twice. >> > >> > In any case, I guess what I'd really like to know is: >> > >> > 1) How good are the ocamlcp and ocamloptp tools and how would you get a >> > vanilla oasis/ocamlbuild combo to easily start using them instead? >> > >> > 2) Are there any ppx based profiling tools out there? I need both >> memory and >> > time profiling to be done. OCamlviz was great because it had a graph-I >> don't >> > necessarily need a dedicated gui, but some way to visualize the data >> would >> > be very helpful. >> > > --001a114e650eb71fd405220c6baa Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Oh wait! There's a source rewriter that myself literal= ly used just two days ago that can eliminate camlp4 instances in favor of p= px. Lol, I should have remembered this *facepalm*. Yeah, so the complexity = of such an undertaking just dropped significantly in my perception=C2=A0

On Wed, Oct 14= , 2015 at 4:25 AM, Kenneth Adam Miller <kennethadammiller@gmail.= com> wrote:
That sounds like it would definitely be a good benefit to the community a= nd I'd be really happy to do it. I know that ppx is the successor to ca= mlp4, and I have a mind to teach myself the sort of magic where I can annot= ate a type with some code generating function because I appreciate the powe= r.

But right now, my extra curricular work is just ridic= ulously over loaded. In my free time I'm teaching myself Coq, compiler = construction with llvm, taking a coursera course working on a shingled disa= ssembler, working on an ocamljava backend for ctypes and a ocaml link to CZ= MQ. I love what I do - coding and learning all day long - but I have human = limits, and I just don't think I would be able to pick it up for probab= ly 6-8 months. Possibly something else will come along before then, whether= that be even more compelling challenges or that ocamlviz is seconded by so= mething better.

So, I really honestly would, but I don't think I= can. :(

On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 4:11 AM,= Gabriel Scherer <gabriel.scherer@gmail.com> wrote:<= br>
Have you considered porting ocamlviz to p= px?

On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 9:44 AM, Kenneth Adam Miller
<kennet= hadammiller@gmail.com> wrote:
> So, I'm looking to do some performance profiling of some libraries= and
> tools. I would like some tools that are more language facilitated than= an
> alternative of using something like oprofile because while oprofile is= good,
> you can only guess at what is consuming the most time in your actual o= caml
> source because all the function names have been lost by that time.
>
> I found ocamlviz, and that seems pretty good, but I'm looking for = something
> else because we plan to move away from using camlp4 toward ppx. Introd= ucing
> this will mean an additional hurdle to overcome once the transition is=
> complete in terms of customizing the build chain twice.
>
> In any case, I guess what I'd really like to know is:
>
> 1) How good are the ocamlcp and ocamloptp tools and how would you get = a
> vanilla oasis/ocamlbuild combo to easily start using them instead?
>
> 2) Are there any ppx based profiling tools out there? I need both memo= ry and
> time profiling to be done. OCamlviz was great because it had a graph-I= don't
> necessarily need a dedicated gui, but some way to visualize the data w= ould
> be very helpful.


--001a114e650eb71fd405220c6baa--