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 QAA17916 for caml-redistribution@pauillac.inria.fr; Fri, 24 Mar 2000 16:49:04 +0100 (MET) Resent-Message-Id: <200003241549.QAA17916@pauillac.inria.fr> 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 DAA28848 for ; Fri, 24 Mar 2000 03:50:59 +0100 (MET) Received: from kurims.kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp (kurims.kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp [130.54.16.1]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA24515 for ; Fri, 24 Mar 2000 03:50:57 +0100 (MET) Received: from localhost (sansho.kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp [130.54.16.90]) by kurims.kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp (8.9.3/3.7W) with ESMTP id LAA02647; Fri, 24 Mar 2000 11:50:18 +0900 (JST) To: maxs@in.ot.com.au Cc: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: Unsigned integers? In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 23 Mar 2000 13:08:54 +1100" <38D97CB6.1465CD8@in.ot.com.au> References: <38D97CB6.1465CD8@in.ot.com.au> X-Mailer: Mew version 1.93 on Emacs 20.5 / Mule 4.0 (HANANOEN) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20000324115017Y.garrigue@kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp> Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 11:50:17 +0900 From: Jacques Garrigue X-Dispatcher: imput version 980905(IM100) Resent-From: weis@pauillac.inria.fr Resent-Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 16:49:04 +0100 Resent-To: caml-redistribution@pauillac.inria.fr From: Max Skaller > Note these operations MUST be extremely fast, > and in particular, compact storage of ISO-10646 > code points in arrays of integers is OK, > while arrays of boxed values is out of the question. > (So I can't use int32). If compact storage is the problem, ocaml 3.00 also provides bigarrays, which allow you to store int32 values in flat arrays (even multidimensional). For the cost of boxing/unboxing in int32 computations, you will probably have to test whether it meets your needs or not. By the way, is there any plan to do for int32 the same kind of optimizations as are done for floats (no boxing/unboxing in the middle of a computation)? Already done? --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jacques Garrigue Kyoto University garrigue at kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp JG