On Thu, 2005-03-17 at 10:31 +0000, Jon Harrop wrote:
> 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 

It could be specific to i386 code generation.

Tail-recursive is faster for both of your tests on both of the amd64
machines (512/1024k L2 cache sizes) I tried on when using 64-bit
binaries but slightly slower for the first case when using 32-bit
binaries.