From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.82]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 094A7BC37 for ; Wed, 28 Oct 2009 17:05:56 +0100 (CET) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Al0GAMcI6EpQW+UMgGdsb2JhbACbPwEBFCZHAwEBvhGEPwSBYQ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.44,640,1249250400"; d="scan'208";a="39109085" Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]) by mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/AES256-SHA; 28 Oct 2009 17:05:55 +0100 Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1N3B1w-0003u3-QH for caml-list@inria.fr; Wed, 28 Oct 2009 17:05:48 +0100 Received: from ks300734.kimsufi.com ([91.121.65.225]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 28 Oct 2009 17:05:48 +0100 Received: from sylvain by ks300734.kimsufi.com with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 28 Oct 2009 17:05:48 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: caml-list@inria.fr From: Sylvain Le Gall Subject: Re: How to read different ints from a Bigarray? Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 16:05:21 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <87eiond3of.fsf@frosties.localdomain> <95513600910280837p2e8c3126s540f4a5d4b7f1824@mail.gmail.com> X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ks300734.kimsufi.com User-Agent: slrn/pre1.0.0-11 (Linux) Sender: news X-Spam: no; 0.00; le-gall:01 bigarray:01 andrieu:01 oandrieu:01 constructors:01 compiler:01 bigarray:01 compiler:01 28,:98 2009:98 wrote:01 wrote:01 ints:01 nerim:01 int:01 Hello, On 28-10-2009, Olivier Andrieu wrote: > On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 14:54, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: >> Yes. > > really ? Given the number of Pbigarray* constructors in the compiler > code, I'd be surprised :) > No I think that for some cases like "accessing a 64bits bigarray on a > 32bits arch" result in a C call, but otherwise it's handled by the > compiler. > Indeed I just test and you are right. I must have experienced this behavior with int64 or something like this. Regards, Sylvain Le Gall