From: Xavier Leroy <Xavier.Leroy@inria.fr>
To: Keith Wansbrough <Keith.Wansbrough@cl.cam.ac.uk>
Cc: Daniel Andor <da209@cam.ac.uk>, Ocaml <caml-list@inria.fr>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] looping recursion
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2004 11:57:16 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040729095716.GC13419@yquem.inria.fr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <E1Bq7Aj-0001vn-00@mta1.cl.cam.ac.uk>
> > Lemme try it out (10^6 elements):
> >
> > ocamlc:
> > rev rev_map version:
> > 2 WALL ( 1.19 usr + 0.02 sys = 1.21 CPU)
> > vanilla map:
> > 7 WALL ( 6.50 usr + 0.09 sys = 6.59 CPU)
> >
> > ocamlopt:
> > rev rev_map version:
> > 1 WALL ( 0.81 usr + 0.03 sys = 0.84 CPU)
> > vanilla map:
> > 2 WALL ( 2.45 usr + 0.02 sys = 2.47 CPU)
>
> OK, so why is List.map in the OCaml standard library implemented the
> vanilla way rather than the rev rev_map way? If it's such a big win,
> it seems foolish to have a broken implementation for such a crucial
> function.
Because for smaller list the "vanilla way" is more efficient.
In the test above, the vanilla way spends significant time resizing
the stack. I suspect that when running it a second time on a already
resized stack, the timings would improve quite a lot.
- Xavier Leroy
-------------------
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
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-07-29 9:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-07-27 23:43 briand
2004-07-28 0:27 ` John Prevost
2004-07-28 0:38 ` John Prevost
2004-07-28 1:17 ` skaller
2004-07-28 1:05 ` briand
2004-07-28 1:43 ` Brian Hurt
2004-07-28 2:49 ` briand
2004-07-28 3:12 ` Brian Hurt
2004-07-28 3:20 ` Brian Hurt
2004-07-28 5:54 ` brogoff
2004-07-28 7:22 ` Alex Baretta
2004-07-28 16:38 ` brogoff
2004-07-28 19:40 ` Jon Harrop
2004-07-28 20:18 ` Brandon J. Van Every
2004-07-29 6:01 ` Alex Baretta
2004-07-28 21:22 ` brogoff
2004-07-29 9:13 ` Daniel Andor
2004-07-29 9:25 ` Keith Wansbrough
2004-07-29 9:41 ` Nicolas Cannasse
2004-07-29 9:57 ` Xavier Leroy [this message]
2004-07-29 10:44 ` Daniel Andor
2004-07-29 12:56 ` brogoff
2004-07-29 10:11 ` skaller
2004-07-29 12:41 ` brogoff
2004-07-29 6:28 ` Alex Baretta
2004-07-29 14:58 ` brogoff
2004-07-29 16:12 ` Brian Hurt
2004-07-29 17:49 ` james woodyatt
2004-07-29 19:25 ` Brian Hurt
2004-07-29 20:01 ` brogoff
2004-07-30 4:42 ` james woodyatt
2004-07-29 17:44 ` james woodyatt
2004-07-29 23:12 ` skaller
2004-07-29 22:42 ` Alex Baretta
2004-07-30 2:38 ` Corey O'Connor
[not found] ` <200407300136.14042.jon@jdh30.plus.com>
2004-07-30 12:45 ` Alex Baretta
2004-07-30 17:07 ` brogoff
2004-07-30 18:25 ` [Caml-list] kaplan-okasaki-tarjan deque (was "looping recursion") james woodyatt
2004-07-30 21:20 ` brogoff
2004-07-31 5:37 ` james woodyatt
2004-07-28 7:27 ` [Caml-list] looping recursion skaller
2004-07-28 14:36 ` Brian Hurt
2004-07-28 22:05 ` skaller
2004-07-28 0:37 ` skaller
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20040729095716.GC13419@yquem.inria.fr \
--to=xavier.leroy@inria.fr \
--cc=Keith.Wansbrough@cl.cam.ac.uk \
--cc=caml-list@inria.fr \
--cc=da209@cam.ac.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox