From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id XAA06982; Tue, 20 Nov 2001 23:38:16 +0100 (MET) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id XAA06670 for ; Tue, 20 Nov 2001 23:38:15 +0100 (MET) Received: from comtv.ru (mail.comtv.ru [217.10.32.4]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.10.0) with ESMTP id fAKMcET24001 for ; Tue, 20 Nov 2001 23:38:15 +0100 (MET) Received: from [10.2.64.72] (HELO oyster2) by comtv.ru (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 1169873 for caml-list@inria.fr; Wed, 21 Nov 2001 01:38:09 +0300 Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 01:35:53 +0300 (MSK) From: malc X-Sender: malc@oyster To: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Benchmark: ref update vs argument passing In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk On Tue, 20 Nov 2001, Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk wrote: > Tue, 20 Nov 2001 16:11:27 +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli pisze: > > > Are these tests realistic or I am missing something? > > IMHO they are too small to draw generic conclusions. > > You can compile with 'ocamlopt -S' and see the assembler output. > This one looks yet better than use_arg (on Intel at least): > > let use_refs' time = > let rif = ref 0 in > for i = 0 to time - 1 do rif := !rif + 1 done; > !rif let use_refs' time = let rif = ref 0 in for i = 0 to pred time do incr rif done; !rif Sorry couldnt resist.. -- mailto:malc@pulsesoft.com ------------------- Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr