> I've noticed that using a class where a module would suffice produces 
> substantially larger native code objects.

This has been my experience too, and is a bit of a concern for me.

> I haven't looked closely enough to know all the details, but it looks 
> like object creation costs about the same as record creation.  All the 
> extra space appears to be in the class initializer functions and the 
> static data they require.  Seems like a fair trade, but I still have 
> questions.
> 
> 	1) Is there any room for improvement in the space requirements of
> 	   class implementations generated by the compilers?

I can imagine a couple of simple changes that could reduce slightly the
size of the class initializer code.  But nothing drastic yet.

> 	2) Are there any idioms to avoid that greatly increase the space
> 	   requirements of classes without offering any benefit in time or
> 	   code maintenance?

Apparently, most of the overhead is present even for very simple
classes (object ... end, without inheritance), so I don't think the
programming style impacts code size significantly.

- Xavier Leroy
-------------------
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