On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 09:57:51AM +0200, Xavier Leroy wrote:
> > > 2) there are no problems using bytecode :
> > >      0.3s using bytecode
> > >      23s  using native
> 
> This I doubt very much, and indeed a quick test shows that bytecode
> and native take exactly the same time.  This isn't surprising:
> since 99% of the time is spent is the regexp engine, and this engine
> is in C, it runs at the same speed in bytecode and in native-code.

I have no idea *why* but here (Linux, x86), using ocamlc and ocamlopt
3.06, I get exactly the same timings (i.e. 0.44s for bytecode and 21.91s
for native code). No special options (like -p or -g) were used for
compilation.

Does the bytecode and nativecode use *exectly* the same C engine (i.e.
maybe one is compiled with different options (like -fpic -O2 or
someting) ?)

-- 
: Michal Moskal :: http://www.kernel.pl/~malekith : GCS {C,UL}++++$ a? !tv
: PLD Linux ::::::::: Wroclaw University, CS Dept : {E-,w}-- {b++,e}>+++ h

-------------------
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