]> Xavier Leroy <xavier.leroy@inria.fr> writes: > [...] you pay one more indirection [...] Is there a theoretical reason for the native compiler not to resolve module indirections (including inlining) statically at compile time? [I see that it would break independent compilation for the bytecode compiler, but the native compiler requires recompilation of dependent modules anyway.] Or is there a technical reason other than potential code bloat? Or are there plane to implement it? In most cases, the performance penalty will be only a small constant factor, but it would be nice not having to worry about it at all --- even in hotspots. Curious, -Thorsten -- Thorsten Ohl, Physics Dept., Wuerzburg Univ. -- ohl@physik.uni-wuerzburg.de http://theorie.physik.uni-wuerzburg.de/~ohl/ [<=== PGP public key here] ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners