Browse thread
Re: [Caml-list] Benchmark: ref update vs argument passing
- Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk
[
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: | -- (:) |
| From: | Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk <qrczak@k...> |
| Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] Benchmark: ref update vs argument passing |
Wed, 21 Nov 2001 01:35:53 +0300 (MSK), malc <malc@pulsesoft.com> pisze:
>> let use_refs' time =
>> let rif = ref 0 in
>> for i = 0 to time - 1 do rif := !rif + 1 done;
>> !rif
> let use_refs' time =
> let rif = ref 0 in
> for i = 0 to pred time do incr rif done;
> !rif
The generated code is exactly the same :-P
But none of the following produces optimal code (judging by looking
at the generated code):
let current = ref 0
let next1 () = let x = !current in incr current; x
let next2 () = let x = !current in current := x + 1; x
let next3 () = incr current; !current
let next4 () = let x = !current + 1 in current := x; x
Moreover, making the counter private on the declaration level:
let next1 =
let current = ref 0 in
fun () -> let x = !current in incr current; x
yields worse code, even though the semantics is the same.
--
__("< Marcin Kowalczyk * qrczak@knm.org.pl http://qrczak.ids.net.pl/
\__/
^^
QRCZAK
-------------------
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