From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: (from weis@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id RAA16179 for caml-redistribution; Wed, 12 Mar 1997 17:23:47 +0100 (MET)
Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id VAA29058 for <caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr>; Tue, 11 Mar 1997 21:22:17 +0100 (MET)
Received: from vegemite.Stanford.EDU (vegemite.Stanford.EDU [171.65.76.158]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id VAA25822 for <caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr>; Tue, 11 Mar 1997 21:22:15 +0100 (MET)
Received: (arc@localhost) by vegemite.Stanford.EDU (8.7.1/8.6.4) id LAA28111 for caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr; Tue, 11 Mar 1997 11:31:30 -0800 (PST)
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 1997 11:31:30 -0800 (PST)
From: Andrew Conway <arc@sequence.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <199703111931.LAA28111@vegemite.Stanford.EDU>
To: caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr
Subject: New C interfaces
Sender: weis


Dear o'caml community,

I have been reading the 1.04 documentation on the C language interface,
and it occured to me that one could get library routined compiled with ocamlopt
to live in harmony with the top level by compiling the library routines
using ocamlopt -output-obj, and then linking them into the toplevel
using -custom. It looks messy but practical. 

Are there any problems with this, apart from the hassle? 
Does this make multiple copies of the garbage collector?

I have a small number of numeric routines that I link into the
top level, and it would be very nice to have them operating more
quickly.

(By the way: there are still many references to caml light in chapter 13.)

[ resume:

Je pense qu'on peut utiliser "ocamlopt -output-obj" et "ocamlmktop -custom"
pour vitesse. Pourquoi pas?

]