Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 15:39:22 -0300
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Mat=EDas?= Giovannini <email@example.com>
Subject: Re: [GC] Evaluate memory use
Damien Doligez wrote:
> >From: David.Mentre@irisa.fr (David =?iso-8859-1?q?Mentré?=)
> >If I've understood the 2.02 doc, the compaction mechanism is disabled by
> >default. Right? So the below method is safe. Right?
> >Oh no. I've managed to use it. :) That's only because I must use the
> >Unix module solely on this purpose. It was just to avoid such use.
> Maybe some day, we'll have date and time functions in the standard
> -- Damien
Hm, I can see a new debate coming about the vagaries of calendrical
calculations around the world...
ObOCaml, it would be *extremely* useful if it only were
1- A system-independent time service, together with:
2- A system-independent time-base value (say, microseconds), and
3- A system-independent date-zero value (say, the datetime of release of
What I'm thinking about is a sub-second TOD clock that could serve both
as a timer and as a clock. If the OS doesn't provide it, it's relatively
easy to sinthesize such a clock with a wall clock and a sub-second
timer. The critical point in doing it inside the language and not in the
library would be thread synchronization, but maybe I'm mistaken.
PS.: I just realized that the hypotetical Clock.t type would have to be
64 bits wide at least, that makes it unwieldly to manipulate inside OCaml.
-- I was seized by the hallucination. I don't remember much, except for being caught in an infinite recursion: I was myself feverishly writing how I was seized by the hallucination. I don't remember much, except for being caught in an infinite recursion.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jan 02 2000 - 11:58:28 MET