On 11/25/2010 11:12 PM, Jon Harrop wrote:
Stefan wrote:
I think OCaml's problem with this benchmark do point at a weakness of the
current
GC code.
What makes you think that ?
I have contributed to some of the solutions that you can find there (and
some other ones were rejected because cachi
Maybe you should read "Tainted Truth: The Manipulation of Fact In
America" by Cynthia Crossen ?
--Fabrice
Isaac Gouy wrote, On 11/23/2010 03:20 AM:
> Dario Teixeira yahoo.com> writes:
> -snip-
>> There's lies, damn lies, and shootout statistics.
> -snip-
>
> After all, facts are facts,
> and a
2010/11/22 Török Edwin :
> Isn't it possible for the GC to realise its doing too many collections
> and increase the minor heap size on its own?
Indeed, it could notice that a lot of data is being moved to the major
heap, and double its size in consequence, until a maximum limit is
reached.
The
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 3:04 PM, Gerd Stolpmann wrote:
> So maybe a good opportunity to post better Ocaml solutions there?
I spent some time improving OCaml solutions, and most of the time, my
solutions were refused: the organizers don't let you unroll loops, fix
GC parameters, etc. One strength
Benedikt Meurer wrote, On 11/19/2010 06:29 AM:
> This is indeed very interesting. I haven't thought of the native top-level. I
> haven't done any measurements yet, but from my experience with ocamlopt, I
> know that the optimizing native compiler is somewhat slower than the
> byte-code compiler.
arn from
> actual
> ocaml compiler writers, BTW, your comments are much appreciated.
> Regards,
> On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 12:05 PM, Fabrice Le Fessant
> wrote:
>>
>> The problem is still the same: even if the code is compiled by a C
>> compiler, there is still the ne
The problem is still the same: even if the code is compiled by a C
compiler, there is still the need for the garbage collector. If you
don't provide your own conservative GC (for which you would have to
reimplement all the native functions of OCaml), then you need to use
OCaml GC, and you would hav
Ethan Burns wrote, On 09/01/2010 11:54 AM:
> On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 4:31 AM, Fabrice Le Fessant
> wrote:
>> If you replace (!r +. 0.) by (!r), you are passing the content of the
>> reference as an argument to the function. Function arguments are not
>> unboxed in ocamlopt
> Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
> Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners
> Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs
>
--
Fabrice LE FESSANT
Chercheur, Equipe ASAP
(As Scalable As Possible)
http://www.lefessant.net/
INRIA-Futurs, Bat P
ght be proposed
other positions within the OCamlPro initiative.
Candidates should contact Fabrice LE FESSANT
(fabrice.le_fess...@inria.fr), with a detailed CV and an application
letter.
<>___
Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management:
http
leurs profils (expérience
professionnelle et connaissance du langage OCaml et de ses arcanes),
les candidats pourront se voir proposer d'autres
postes au sein de l'initiative OCamlPro.
Les candidats intéressés peuvent prendre contact avec Fabrice
gt; interesting, but having only one is definitely simpler.
>
> Is this a known problem ? is there fundamental reasons in the compilers
> for which it can not be changed ?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Mathias
>
> ___
> Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management:
>
> Regards,
> Sylvain Le Gall
>
> ___
> Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management:
> http://yquem.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/caml-list
> Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
> Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/oca
other advice and will use Bigarray.
>
> Stas
>
> ___
> Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management:
> http://yquem.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/caml-list
> Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
> Beginner's list: http://groups
14 matches
Mail list logo
