From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <berenger@riken.jp>
Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104])
	by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C2E587EE99
	for <caml-list@sympa.inria.fr>; Tue, 21 Jan 2014 03:06:04 +0100 (CET)
Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  berenger@riken.jp) identity=pra; client-ip=134.160.33.176;
  receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="berenger@riken.jp";
  x-sender="berenger@riken.jp"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible
Received-SPF: Pass (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: domain of
  berenger@riken.jp designates 134.160.33.176 as permitted
  sender) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=134.160.33.176;
  receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="berenger@riken.jp";
  x-sender="berenger@riken.jp"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible;
  x-record-type="v=spf1"
Received-SPF: Pass (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: domain of
  postmaster@postman.riken.jp designates 134.160.33.176 as
  permitted sender) identity=helo; client-ip=134.160.33.176;
  receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="berenger@riken.jp";
  x-sender="postmaster@postman.riken.jp";
  x-conformance=sidf_compatible; x-record-type="v=spf1"
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AokDANPU3VKGoCGwh2dsb2JhbABZvGuCfQqBJA4BAQEKCwkHFiiCJQEBAQQ4QBELGAkWDwkDAgECAUUTCAEBiAHEDhePBhaEIgEDiUWOXZVU
X-IPAS-Result: AokDANPU3VKGoCGwh2dsb2JhbABZvGuCfQqBJA4BAQEKCwkHFiiCJQEBAQQ4QBELGAkWDwkDAgECAUUTCAEBiAHEDhePBhaEIgEDiUWOXZVU
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.95,693,1384297200"; 
   d="scan'208";a="45499280"
Received: from postman4.riken.jp (HELO postman.riken.jp) ([134.160.33.176])
  by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 21 Jan 2014 03:06:03 +0100
Received: from postman.riken.jp (postman4.riken.jp [127.0.0.1])
	by postman.riken.jp (Postfix) with SMTP id 23A688280E3
	for <caml-list@inria.fr>; Tue, 21 Jan 2014 11:06:00 +0900 (JST)
Received: from watson.prg.gsc.riken.jp (ipm04.gsc.riken.go.jp [134.160.83.74])
	by postman.riken.jp (Postfix) with ESMTPA id E7BEA7F803F
	for <caml-list@inria.fr>; Tue, 21 Jan 2014 11:05:59 +0900 (JST)
Message-ID: <52DDD607.5020507@riken.jp>
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 11:05:59 +0900
From: Francois Berenger <berenger@riken.jp>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: caml-list@inria.fr
References: <sympa.1390216798.28729.17@inria.fr>
In-Reply-To: <sympa.1390216798.28729.17@inria.fr>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-PMX-Version: 6.0.0.2142326, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.2.2107409, Antispam-Data: 2014.1.21.15715
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] How much optimized is the 'a option type ?

Isn't this thread about people wanting to have monadic code
in OCaml going faster?

Someone has in mind some optimization that would make
all monadic code faster, right?
Not only the 'a option case, I hope.

On 01/20/2014 08:23 PM, Jonathan Kimmitt wrote:
> OCaml already uses the number 1 to represent
> 0(sic), [], and None. Type safety prevents them getting mixed up.
> The integer 1 would be represented by 3, and so on. Since pointers
> are always even (on sensible platforms) this helps the garbage collector
> to quickly scan without caring too much about what it all means.