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=2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,DNS_FROM_RFC_POST, 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 mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 904D3BBC4 for ; Fri, 3 Apr 2009 17:04:35 +0200 (CEST) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AhEDAMLC1UlIDtyck2dsb2JhbACVYz8BAQEBCQkKCREDqGmQLgEDAQOEDAaGCg X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.39,319,1235948400"; d="scan'208";a="25581879" Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com ([72.14.220.156]) by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 03 Apr 2009 17:04:24 +0200 Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id 19so1001067fgg.20 for ; Fri, 03 Apr 2009 08:04:23 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:sender:message-id:from:to :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version :subject:date:references:x-mailer; bh=xtNDmhkSo0vsxT9/EcccKTxy/G7DkwrXhCJa1hDERO8=; b=bgxwWjHeyqlCAC7yjmtENNwJFGNZkt4mpSHXaNMQcnt1jppsittETQbgYV619Vmzae pKEYFrW+uZuJlbbpFdsgjQJrf0JHbrlXmB+MBS2c3/btSCQlM4MGR6SarMW1N0gACEAQ CHWlKZDsJm8KYa70Pl2y2lgI81m5D/h0Z1gn4= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=sender:message-id:from:to:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject:date:references :x-mailer; b=wXf3llwvq4cFeU3cB1l2qPTrq3bpengsHhpAXoc95yZG7sJL0cKk+qmBLEQrPfo3H9 1b/J5MmkiBXlqqZqlsQ8+OWsXGcgEn3zeGLMmFglUDpqmpPzhjaVwwI9hW+iEdHvortL YJ9Xkkr9449vZHcgP8X5S+wsjj3FI1S4XIKGw= Received: by 10.86.87.5 with SMTP id k5mr1121661fgb.5.1238771063885; Fri, 03 Apr 2009 08:04:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?192.168.1.34? (11-195.76-83.cust.bluewin.ch [83.76.195.11]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 12sm9098221fgg.17.2009.04.03.08.04.23 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Fri, 03 Apr 2009 08:04:23 -0700 (PDT) Sender: =?UTF-8?Q?Daniel_B=C3=BCnzli?= Message-Id: From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Daniel_B=FCnzli?= To: OCaml List In-Reply-To: <200904031546.14071.jon@ffconsultancy.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Strings Date: Fri, 3 Apr 2009 17:03:25 +0200 References: <200904031256.33357.jon@ffconsultancy.com> <200904031546.14071.jon@ffconsultancy.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) X-Spam: no; 0.00; bunzli:01 buenzli:01 ocaml:01 translating:01 non-trivial:01 ocaml's:01 byte:01 byte:01 arrays:01 mutable:01 arrays:01 46,:98 caml-list:01 immutable:01 strings:01 Le 3 avr. 09 =E0 16:46, Jon Harrop a =E9crit : > Just because my OCaml programs were mutating strings and translating =20= > that into > F# is non-trivial if the string is shared or big. In essence, I've =20 > always > used OCaml's strings as a more efficient byte array. In fact, the best > translation to F# is often to use byte arrays as a replacement for =20 > strings. So immutable strings are not a "PITA" you are just using them for =20 something they should not be taken for (mutable byte arrays). Daniel