On Mon, Nov 02, 2009 at 05:11:27PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Richard Jones <rich@annexia.org> writes:
> 
> > On Sun, Nov 01, 2009 at 04:11:52PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> >> But C calls are still 33% slower than direct access in ocaml (if one
> >> doesn't use the polymorphic functions).
> >
> > Are you using noalloc calls?
> >
> > http://camltastic.blogspot.com/2008/08/tip-calling-c-functions-directly-with.html
> 
> Yes. And I looked at the bigarray module and couldn't figure out how
> they differ from my own external function. Only difference I see is
> the leading "%" on the external name. What does that do?

That means that it is using a hardcoded OCaml primitive, whose code can be
generated by the compiler via C--. See asmcomp/cmmgen.ml.

> > I would love to see inline assembler supported by the compiler.

It might be possible to hack support for C-- expressions in external
declarations. That'd be a sort of portable assembler.

-- 
Mauricio Fernandez  -   http://eigenclass.org