[
Home
]
[ Index:
by date
|
by threads
]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: | 1999-11-24 (22:19) |
From: | Matías Giovannini <matias@k...> |
Subject: | Re: [GC] Evaluate memory use |
Damien Doligez wrote: > > >From: David.Mentre@irisa.fr (David =?iso-8859-1?q?Mentré?=) > > >If I've understood the 2.02 doc, the compaction mechanism is disabled by > >default. Right? So the below method is safe. Right? > > Yes. > > >Oh no. I've managed to use it. :) That's only because I must use the > >Unix module solely on this purpose. It was just to avoid such use. > > Maybe some day, we'll have date and time functions in the standard > library. > > -- Damien Hm, I can see a new debate coming about the vagaries of calendrical calculations around the world... ObOCaml, it would be *extremely* useful if it only were 1- A system-independent time service, together with: 2- A system-independent time-base value (say, microseconds), and 3- A system-independent date-zero value (say, the datetime of release of CamlLight 0.7). What I'm thinking about is a sub-second TOD clock that could serve both as a timer and as a clock. If the OS doesn't provide it, it's relatively easy to sinthesize such a clock with a wall clock and a sub-second timer. The critical point in doing it inside the language and not in the library would be thread synchronization, but maybe I'm mistaken. Best regards, Matías PS.: I just realized that the hypotetical Clock.t type would have to be 64 bits wide at least, that makes it unwieldly to manipulate inside OCaml. -- I was seized by the hallucination. I don't remember much, except for being caught in an infinite recursion: I was myself feverishly writing how I was seized by the hallucination. I don't remember much, except for being caught in an infinite recursion.