On Thursday 17 March 2005 03:35, brogoff wrote:
> I just ran your counterexample and the tail recursive code was faster
> for each. I used native code compilation.

That's odd. My previous results were for a 1.2GHz Athlon t-bird, ocamlopt 
3.08. Tail recursion is also significantly slower on an 866MHz P3 (x86 
native-code) with ocamlopt 3.07:

Non-tail-recursive took: 0.873906s
Tail-recursive took: 1.005320s

Non-tail-recursive took: 4.288313s
Tail-recursive took: 0.986330s

And on an Athlon MP 2600+ with ocamlopt 3.06:

Non-tail-recursive took: 0.289890s
Tail-recursive took: 0.332338s

Non-tail-recursive took: 1.981812s
Tail-recursive took: 0.332071s

This may be a cache effect as these CPUs all have 256kb cache. Perhaps if you 
try a smaller/larger problem depending on your cache size...

-- 
Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
Objective CAML for Scientists
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/ocaml_for_scientists