Browse thread
[Caml-list] What's the current status of int32 and int64 boxing?
-
John Prevost
- Xavier Leroy
[
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: | Xavier Leroy <Xavier.Leroy@i...> |
| Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] What's the current status of int32 and int64 boxing? |
> I was just wondering what exactly to expect for performance with int32 > and int64 types in records and arrays right now. Browsing through the > archives, I got the feeling that these types currently appear unboxed > in record types, but boxed in array types. Is that still correct? No: int32 and int64 are always boxed in records and arrays. Only "big arrays" (the Bigarray library) support unboxed int32 and int64 elements. - 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