From: Robert Roessler <roessler@rftp.com>
To: Caml-list <caml-list@inria.fr>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] ocamlc vs ocamlc.opt?
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 02:15:54 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <45D2E15A.8010700@rftp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <45D25864.2050307@rftp.com>
Robert Roessler wrote:
> ...
> Given "Compatibility with the bytecode compiler is extremely high: the
> same source code should run identically when compiled with ocamlc and
> ocamlopt." in Chapter 11 of the OCaml manual, I am really not expecting
> ocamlc and ocamlc.opt to function any differently. Choosing either of
> the commands from a cleanly built OCaml installation should be a matter
> of taste or personal preference, NOT correctness.
I performed further tests and gathered more data on this. I verified
that the cmo and cmi files produced by the two versions of ocamlc are
identical - they are (well, at least their md5 hashes are). So this
would suggest that it is not the COMPILE portions of the two ocamlc
versions that are causing this - which leaves how the BYTECODE-mode
executable is produced.
Covering even more bases, I pulled the CVS version of the OCaml source
tree and built it on the target FC6/gcc 4.1.1 box... NO change.
Again, what IS the difference in operation between the two versions of
ocamlc, one built as a BYTECODE executable, the other built NATIVE?
Robert Roessler
roessler@rftp.com
http://www.rftp.com
prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-02-14 10:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-01-31 22:16 Robert Roessler
2007-02-03 0:21 ` [Caml-list] " Aleksey Nogin
2007-02-03 8:56 ` Robert Roessler
[not found] ` <95513600702010017y2f4ab9eex18b2fa3a52c987e@mail.gmail.com>
2007-02-14 0:31 ` Robert Roessler
2007-02-14 10:15 ` Robert Roessler [this message]
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=45D2E15A.8010700@rftp.com \
--to=roessler@rftp.com \
--cc=caml-list@inria.fr \
/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