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 OAA14498; Fri, 11 Jan 2002 14:58:58 +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 OAA15331 for ; Fri, 11 Jan 2002 14:58:57 +0100 (MET) Received: from comtv.ru (mail.comtv.ru [217.10.32.4]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id g0BDwuT25053 for ; Fri, 11 Jan 2002 14:58:56 +0100 (MET) Received: from [10.0.66.9] ([10.0.66.9] verified) by comtv.ru (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.5.2) with ESMTP id 1764466 for caml-list@inria.fr; Fri, 11 Jan 2002 16:58:54 +0300 Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 16:57:13 -0500 (EST) From: malc X-Sender: malc@home.oyster.ru To: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: [Caml-list] Is it really a non issue? Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk I noticed that my bug report was silently moved to 'not a bug' section. Despite report's subject 'Not a bug, but...' i do think its atleast an issue. Consider this: file a.ml: let a = 1 file a.mli: val a : int \ val a : int | ........... | n times val a : int | val a : int / After compilation/linking we will get huge .cmi and binary with data section (n-1)*4(on 32bit architectures) bytes bigger that it should have been. Current ocamlopt.opt is 12 bytes bigger due to redundant declartions in bytecomp/lambda.mli(is_guarded,patch_guarded) and utils/clflags.ml(dump_scheduling), not a big deal but still anoying. -- 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