From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13D4CBBAF for ; Thu, 7 Aug 2008 19:28:30 +0200 (CEST) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApIAAHnNmkjVJFBbmmdsb2JhbACRPAEBAQEBCAUIBxEDmzY X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.31,321,1215381600"; d="scan'208";a="15802735" Received: from mx-out.libertysurf.net (HELO mail.libertysurf.net) ([213.36.80.91]) by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 07 Aug 2008 19:28:29 +0200 Received: from [192.168.1.3] (88.123.246.197) by mail.libertysurf.net (7.3.118.8) id 484CEE8B00DDE0E3 for caml-list@yquem.inria.fr; Thu, 7 Aug 2008 20:30:57 +0200 From: Florent Monnier To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Subject: C / OCaml exchange ratio Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2008 19:30:52 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.8.2 X-Face: -0"dKXwF0PiXr]fa$^)NJY7$;waqUckGcM7&q,VU?Xv\[=CiVM]g]pDs^xmfU9+Q=Z,OdfMHUR-7Ao%evJh.=aiq,#r0Ux0dm'!l|zeAXj||$>1_(Lv4Hc",&F}sbHeK0`SBA$_|XP MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200808071930.52851.fmonnier@linux-nantes.fr.eu.org> X-Spam: no; 0.00; ocaml:01 ocaml:01 manual:06 function:08 function:08 thanks:17 says:22 calling:22 that:23 what:24 the:27 the:27 ratio:29 ratio:29 than:30 Hi, The manual says that the cost of an ocaml function call from C is more expensive than calling a C function from OCaml. What is approximatively the ratio ? Is it more or less than 2 ? -- thanks Florent