From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7C6DBC8E for ; Tue, 8 Feb 2005 10:02:08 +0100 (CET) Received: from pauillac.inria.fr (pauillac.inria.fr [128.93.11.35]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id j189221t015106 for ; Tue, 8 Feb 2005 10:02:04 +0100 Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id KAA12173 for ; Tue, 8 Feb 2005 10:02:00 +0100 (MET) Received: from will.iki.fi (will.iki.fi [217.169.64.20]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id j1891B4M015037 for ; Tue, 8 Feb 2005 10:01:32 +0100 Received: from acerf.exomi.com (fa-3-0-0.fw.exomi.com [217.169.64.99]) by will.iki.fi (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EE36138; Tue, 8 Feb 2005 11:01:05 +0200 (EET) Subject: Re: [Caml-list] [Benchmark] NBody From: Ville-Pertti Keinonen To: "Will M. Farr" Cc: skaller@users.sourceforge.net, "O'Caml Mailing List" , Christophe TROESTLER In-Reply-To: <80eb59bd970cd828d562f79e8eb565bf@mit.edu> References: <20050207.195724.87945401.Christophe.Troestler@umh.ac.be> <1107826151.13571.199.camel@pelican.wigram> <80eb59bd970cd828d562f79e8eb565bf@mit.edu> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2005 11:01:02 +0200 Message-Id: <1107853262.654.7.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.0.3 FreeBSD GNOME Team Port Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Miltered: at nez-perce with ID 4208800A.002 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Miltered: at nez-perce with ID 42087FD7.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 wrote:01 pointers:01 floats:01 caml:02 somewhere:02 benchmark:02 types:02 float:03 optimization:03 anyway:05 manual:07 cases:08 doesn't:12 doesn't:12 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 (2004-11-16) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled version=3.0.2 X-Spam-Level: On Mon, 2005-02-07 at 20:48 -0500, Will M. Farr wrote: > Doesn't caml store records whose types are all floats as a float array > anyway? I thought I remembered this optimization going by in the > manual somewhere. Yes, it does. I wonder if there's any reason why this can't be done for even more cases. It should work for any record that doesn't contain pointers.