From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id SAA09894; Mon, 28 Oct 2002 18:43:02 +0100 (MET) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f 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 SAA03269 for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2002 18:43:01 +0100 (MET) Received: from hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net (hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.22]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id g9SHh0516514 for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2002 18:43:00 +0100 (MET) Received: from user-0ccegbj.cable.mindspring.com ([24.199.65.115] helo=dragonfly.localdomain) by hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 186DuT-0007n6-00; Mon, 28 Oct 2002 09:42:41 -0800 Received: from 192.168.0.100 (SquirrelMail authenticated user yminsky) by dragonfly.localdomain with HTTP; Mon, 28 Oct 2002 12:42:41 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <33441.192.168.0.100.1035826961.squirrel@dragonfly.localdomain> Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2002 12:42:41 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Strange slowness of input_line on mingw From: "Yaron M. Minsky" To: In-Reply-To: <20021028172825.GA27794@iliana> References: <32026.209.9.234.140.1035468351.squirrel@dragonfly.localdomain> <20021028162614.A2882@pauillac.inria.fr> <1035821576.16358.38.camel@dragonfly.localdomain> <15805.28797.298215.472767@hod.void.org> <20021028172825.GA27794@iliana> X-Priority: 3 Importance: Normal X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Cc: , , X-Mailer: SquirrelMail (version 1.2.6) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk I think the whole wc-connection is a bit of a distraction here. It was just a way of benchmarking the two implementations. The basic issue is that for some reason the same input_line based code is about 50-70 times slower on mingw than it is on Linux. I just wc as a way of making it clear that the difference was not due to hardware differences between the platforms. That said, it might be useful to do something like what you suggest, since it would make it clear whether input_line is the problem, or whether it's a generalized problem with the i/o system. y > > BTW, what about re-implementing wc in ocaml using direct reading of the > file without creating strings, and measure the time taken by this ? > > Friendly, > > Sven Luther > ------------------- > 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 -- |--------/ Yaron M. Minsky \--------| |--------\ http://www.cs.cornell.edu/home/yminsky/ /--------| Open PGP --- KeyID B1FFD916 (new key as of Dec 4th) Fingerprint: 5BF6 83E1 0CE3 1043 95D8 F8D5 9F12 B3A9 B1FF D916 ------------------- 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