Browse thread
[Caml-list] lazy vs function for values that are used once at most
-
henri dubois-ferriere
-
Jon Harrop
- henri dubois-ferriere
-
Jon Harrop
[
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: | 2004-06-30 (14:21) |
From: | henri dubois-ferriere <henridf@g...> |
Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] lazy vs function for values that are used once at most |
ok. actually, i should refine my question a little further: in the vast majority of cases, the value is *not* used at all. so i suppose the memoization overhead you mention does not occur when a lazy value is not forced. so, the question then becomes: any difference in overhead between creating (lazy v) and (fun () -> v) ? thanks for any insights henri On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 14:39:15 +0100, Jon Harrop <postmaster@jdh30.plus.com> wrote: > > > when one has a value v that is going to be either used 0 or 1 time, is > > there any difference in terms of overhead (ie for building the > > closure, GC performance, etc) between passing around (lazy v) and > > then forcing the value if needed, or passing around (fun () -> v) and > > evaluating f when needed? > > IIRC, Lazy is slower because of the (wasted, in this case) overhead of > memoizing the result. > > Cheers, > Jon. > > ------------------- > 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 > ------------------- 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