Browse thread
Strange performances
[
Home
]
[ Index:
by date
|
by threads
]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
| Date: | -- (:) |
| From: | Jon Harrop <jon@f...> |
| Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] Strange performances |
On Friday 18 January 2008 17:52:06 Kuba Ober wrote: > On Friday 18 January 2008, Edgar Friendly wrote: > > Jacques Garrigue wrote: > > > This is why I sent an erratum. The cause for the segfault was not the > > > array access, but the stack overflow, which occured due to ocaml's > > > peculiar evaluation order. > > > > Is there any case where ocaml's "peculiar evaluation order" results in > > any benefit other than slightly simpler code at the compiler level? I > > understand that people shouldn't depend on evaluation order, but it > > seems that people fall into this trap often. And even extremely > > experienced camlers (if you permit this characterization of you) forget > > this behavior. > > I think that if you apply principle of least astonishment, things should be > evaluated left-to-right. Or at least with a consistent rule. I believe this design was chosen to give the compiler more freedom for optimizing but I agree that left to right is preferable. -- Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/?e