caml-list - the Caml user's mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: malc <malc@pulsesoft.com>
To: Thorsten Ohl <ohl@physik.uni-wuerzburg.de>
Cc: caml-list@inria.fr
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Inlining across functors (was: O'Caml vs C++: a little benchmark)
Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 10:25:22 +0400 (MSD)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0208201024190.926-100000@home.oyster.ru> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0208200115290.11439-100000@home.oyster.ru>

On Tue, 20 Aug 2002, malc wrote:

> On Mon, 19 Aug 2002, Thorsten Ohl wrote:
> 
> > Xavier Leroy <xavier.leroy@inria.fr> writes:
> > 
> > > Just for the record: ocamlopt does perform inlining across
> > > compilation units (via the information stored in .cmx files).  What
> > > it doesn't do, however, is inlining and specialization of recursive
> > > function definitions.
> > 
> > However, it appears that it doesn't inline across functors.  For
> > example, in
> snip
> > 
> > Is this because the signature M can make no guarantee that op is never
> > a recursive function? Do all functor applications fall under the `no
> > inlining and specialization of recursive function definitions' clause?
> 
> Yes. With http://algol.prosalg.no/~malc/code/patches/specfun.tar.gz 
> (patch against 3.04) you will get this instead:
> 
> *** Linearized code                                                             
> Opt_f2_72:                                                                      
>   A/11[%ecx] := [env/10[%ecx] + 12]                                             
>   A/12[%ecx] := [A/11[%ecx]]                                                    
>   tailcall "Opt_f_62" R/0[%eax]                                                 
>   R/1[%ebx]                                                                     
>   R/2[%ecx]   
Whoops.. Again a reminder to think before posting.. The real linearized 
code with specfun would be:

*** Linearized code                                                             
Opt_f_76:                                                                       
  n/10[%eax] := a/8[%eax] + b/9[%ebx] + -1                                      
  return R/0[%eax]                                                              
                                                                                
*** Linearized code                                                             
Opt_f2_84:                                                                      
  n/10[%eax] := a/8[%eax] + b/9[%ebx] + -1                                      
  return R/0[%eax]

(Forgot to specify -specialize on command line.. doh)

-- 
mailto:malc@pulsesoft.com

-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners


  parent reply	other threads:[~2002-08-20  6:25 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2002-08-18 17:17 [Caml-list] O'Caml vs C++: a little benchmark Oleg
2002-08-18 18:00 ` William Chesters
2002-08-18 19:06   ` Oleg
2002-08-18 21:37     ` William Chesters
2002-08-19 13:02   ` Xavier Leroy
2002-08-19 13:58     ` [Caml-list] Inlining across functors (was: O'Caml vs C++: a little benchmark) Thorsten Ohl
2002-08-19 21:16       ` malc
2002-08-19 22:06         ` [Caml-list] Specialization (was: Inlining across functors) Thorsten Ohl
2002-08-20  6:35           ` [Caml-list] " malc
2002-08-20  6:25         ` malc [this message]
2002-08-19 14:39     ` [Caml-list] O'Caml vs C++: a little benchmark Oleg
2002-08-19 15:15     ` William Chesters
2002-08-18 19:16 ` Markus Mottl
2002-08-18 19:58   ` Oleg
2002-08-18 22:59     ` Markus Mottl
2002-08-19 13:12 ` malc
2002-08-19 13:22 ` malc
2002-08-23 21:05 ` John Max Skaller
2002-08-23 21:35   ` Oleg
2002-08-28 13:47     ` John Max Skaller
2002-08-28 14:34       ` Alain Frisch
2002-08-28 17:23       ` inlining tail-recursive functions (Re: [Caml-list] O'Caml vs C++: a little benchmark) Oleg
2002-08-31  1:13         ` John Max Skaller

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=Pine.LNX.4.44.0208201024190.926-100000@home.oyster.ru \
    --to=malc@pulsesoft.com \
    --cc=caml-list@inria.fr \
    --cc=ohl@physik.uni-wuerzburg.de \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).