Version française
Home     About     Download     Resources     Contact us    

This site is updated infrequently. For up-to-date information, please visit the new OCaml website at

Browse thread
[Benchmark] NBody
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: -- (:)
From: Oliver Bandel <oliver@f...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] NBody (one more question)
On Fri, Feb 25, 2005 at 09:24:19AM -0800, Ken Rose wrote:
> I'm not familiar with the OCaml code generator, but gcc without 
> optimization produces very naive code.  Each source statement is 
> translated separately, and all variable values are read from & written 
> back to memory.  (Only changed values are written, obviously)  It 
> doesn't do any instruction scheduling beyond what the processor may 
> require for correctness.  It really doesn't do anything more 
> sophisticated than suppressing moves that have the same register as 
> source & destination.

There is a good reason that without optimisations
there will be done none.

1.: It's what it seems to be. And switching optimisation on then
    is also what it seems to be: optimized code...
    So, a chair is a chair and a table is a table and that's good. :)

2.: Optimisation must be switched off to be able to debug... it's good that gcc has the capability to produce non-
    optimized code.... it's not stupid to produce naive code.
    It sometimes is very useful.