Browse thread
[Caml-list] Wish List for Large Mutable Objects
[
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: | Brandon J. Van Every <vanevery@i...> |
| Subject: | RE: [Caml-list] Wish List for Large Mutable Objects |
David McClain wrote: > > I have a perfectly good running VM as user process library > running right now > in C++ that allows for mixed array files, arbitrary offsets > into the file > for various array pointers, and this is all transparent to > the user just as I indicated in my wish list for OCaml. But it doesn't do scatter-gather DMA. A user process only grants so much control, and you seem to want an awful lot of control. Hence my suggestion that you tweak an OS. > In more than 20 years of scientific data access and analysis > I have only > seen uniform arrays, one per file, generated by neophytes. In > just about > every case I can remember; NetCDF, HDF, FITS, RIF Wave Files, > MPEG, etc., these are all compound object files. Us neophytes call them 'file formats'. They aren't arrays. I think we'll be at loggerheads until we agree what an 'array' is. > The trouble with the simple minded > approach of one array per file is that most data acquisitions > will then end > up with dozens of component data files and it becomes a > tracking nightmare > to keep them all coordinated. Not so if you permit compound > document files. What does this have to do with Bigarray? Bigarray provides uniform basic types in unboxed consecutive memory locations, ala C or Fortran. That's the entire point, to communicate with arrays as C and Fortran do them. Why are you expecting it to be something exceedingly different? > With a language as rich and wonderful as OCaml, I really > can't understand your hostility I haven't spoken with hostility. I gather you're somewhat attached to your problems, to view my comments as hostility. > to useful additions to the language. Clearly, you think your ideas are useful to you. Whether others think they're useful to them, remains to be seen. > If you don't want to > play, you don't have to join my sandbox -- find another. You've lost me here. Are you saying that if you hear feedback you don't like, that those giving the feedback should leave caml-list or just be quiet? Cheers, www.indiegamedesign.com Brand*n Van Every S*attle, WA Praise Be to the caml-list Bayesian filter! It blesseth my postings, it is evil crap! evil crap! Bigarray! Unboxed overhead group! Wondering! chant chant chant... ------------------- 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