Version française
Home     About     Download     Resources     Contact us    
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: luc.maranget@i...
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Why + vs +. but "fake" parametric polymorphism for <
> 
> Of course, you may ask why Ocaml's inlining feature isn't clever enough
> to do late specialisation, at least of functions that can be inlined. I
> don't know.
> 
> Gerd
> -- 

Technically, the ocamlc and ocamlopt compilers share a common
front end that performs the specialization (on the so-called
typed syntax, if I remember well).

By design, both compilers have a lot common.

Only the ocamlopt compiler performs inlining, on a later
internal representation of code.

As to re-performing specialisation in ocamlopt back-end,
precise types are lost there, I am afraid. This may be by design.

--Luc