Version française
Home     About     Download     Resources     Contact us    

This site is updated infrequently. For up-to-date information, please visit the new OCaml website at

Browse thread
[Caml-list] Bug? Printf, %X and negative numbers
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: -- (:)
From: Andreas Rossberg <rossberg@p...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Bug? Printf, %X and negative numbers
Ville-Pertti Keinonen wrote:
> One way of doing this much faster is just having a the first word of any 
> mixed block (homogenous blocks aren't a problem) indicate the number of 
> pointers and always put the pointers first.

I'm afraid such a scheme is incompatible with polymorphism, where a slot 
may or may not be a pointer, depending on the actual instantiation. 
Still, polymorphic code must be able to operate uniformingly in both 
cases, i.e. the slot may not be shuffled around.

   - Andreas

Andreas Rossberg,

"Computer games don't affect kids; I mean if Pac Man affected us
  as kids, we would all be running around in darkened rooms, munching
  magic pills, and listening to repetitive electronic music."
  - Kristian Wilson, Nintendo Inc.

To unsubscribe, mail Archives:
Bug reports: FAQ:
Beginner's list: