On Thu, 2004-07-08 at 00:58, Xavier Leroy wrote:

> On the other hand, reducing inefficiencies already present in the
> source code isn't a priority.  

Of course that argument fails totally in one important
case -- Q: if you wanted a loop why didn't you use one?
A: tail-rec functional code is considered cute :)

I'm sure there are other cases .. would not:

let x = 1 in
let y = 1 in
let z = 1 in ...

be optimised into a single closure, not 3?
Or do i really have to write:

let x = 1 and y = 1 and z = 1 in ..

What's efficient depends on what's optimised which
depends on what idioms are considered 'cute' looking :)

BTW: there is another answer to the question Xavier asked:

Q: why did you write the code that way ..?
A: I didn't, it was generated..

which suggests sometimes there is a reason to optimise
'silly' looking code.

-- 
John Skaller, mailto:skaller@users.sf.net
voice: 061-2-9660-0850, 
snail: PO BOX 401 Glebe NSW 2037 Australia
Checkout the Felix programming language http://felix.sf.net



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