Browse thread
RE: [Caml-list] Bug? Printf, %X and negative numbers
-
Gregory Morrisett
-
Ville-Pertti Keinonen
-
Lauri Alanko
- Ville-Pertti Keinonen
- Brian Hurt
-
Lauri Alanko
- brogoff@s...
-
Ville-Pertti Keinonen
[
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: | Ville-Pertti Keinonen <will@e...> |
| Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] Bug? Printf, %X and negative numbers |
> For occasional hotspots where naked integers are essential for > performance, wouldn't the easiest solution be to use the equivalent of > GHC's unboxed ints: a special _non-polymorphic_ datatype that doesn't > have tags. This type would be given a kind different from other types > to > prevent it from being used as a type parameter. Of course the GC still > needs to be prevented from following such values, but a separate stack > for them ought to do the trick. Untagged non-pointers on the stack are already identified by frame descriptors. Something like that but less restrictive could probably be implemented as optimized calling conventions for int32/int64 when explicitly specified. Native-sized integers are currently handled unboxed locally inside functions, they just require boxing when stored in a block, passed as parameters or returned. Using them is pretty inconvenient, though. ------------------- 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