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
Why + vs +. but "fake" parametric polymorphism for <
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: -- (:)
From: Carlos Pita <cpitaper@y...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Why + vs +. but "fake" parametric polymorphism for <

> Of course there is an overhead. But the compiler is clever enough to
> remove this overhead when the types of arguments are statically known.
> In particular this is true for floats.

Oh, I see, so if I understand you it would be enough if I use an integer
literal somewhere or explicitly declare some variable as int so the
compiler can infer that the particular use of the comparison operator is
being passed integer operands and consequently inline an specific,
optimized-for-int, version of <. Am I wrong?

Preguntá. Respondé. Descubrí.
Todo lo que querías saber, y lo que ni imaginabas,
está en Yahoo! Respuestas (Beta).
¡Probalo ya!