Another question: how will 4.03 be handled with regard to OPAM? The way I see it, the majority of users will want Flambda activated by default. Companies or individuals that depend on OCaml for their business will probably want to start off with Flambda turned off, and turn it on as needed. Additionally, to get Flambda tested by as many people as possible, I believe we want people to use it by default. -Yotam On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 4:26 AM, Mark Shinwell wrote: > Not at present. Although the technique of using stubs is heavily used > in Flambda for other optimisations (for example where the argument > list of a function is going to be modified). > > Mark > > On 11 March 2016 at 09:09, Alain Frisch wrote: > > On 11/03/2016 09:59, Mark Shinwell wrote: > >> > >> Also, for a function like the one you gave containing: > >> > >> if then else > >> > >> 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 . In particular when it's true then the > >> large expression can be eliminated completely (so long as 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 > > -- > Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management and archives: > https://sympa.inria.fr/sympa/arc/caml-list > Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners > Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs >