From: Nuutti Kotivuori <naked+caml@naked.iki.fi>
To: "Nicolas Cannasse" <warplayer@free.fr>
Cc: <caml-list@inria.fr>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Object-oriented access bottleneck
Date: Sun, 07 Dec 2003 20:04:29 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87vfoscxn6.fsf@naked.iki.fi> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <002201c3bc6e$195e49e0$0274a8c0@PWARP> (Nicolas Cannasse's message of "Sun, 7 Dec 2003 11:59:14 +0900")
Nicolas Cannasse wrote:
> [...]
>> So - I am asking if I'm correct in my deductions here, or if I
>> missed some important point. Or if there's an alternative way to
>> circumvent this restriction.
>>
>> To summarize - is there any way to have some function (or method or
>> whatever) that is able to access object member data, without the
>> overhead of a lazy binding function call? Preferably ofcourse such
>> a function should be eligible to be inlined.
>>
>> Thanks in advance,
>> -- Naked
>
> There is good way : don't use objects :-) For most of the cases,
> modules should be powerful enough and offer far better
> performances... and inlining. Even if you need some specialisation,
> you can always handle it using a closure.
Yes, obviously :-) But when I do happen to need specialisation, I add
closures as variables in a record or something - and soon I'll be
adding several of them in a single one, then getting bothered that
they take up so much space in the object, then come up with having
special closure-only records that are shared between different records
and... well, as you can see, this only leads to reimplementing the
entire object model myself :-)
-- Naked
-------------------
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:[~2003-12-07 18:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-12-07 2:39 Nuutti Kotivuori
2003-12-07 2:59 ` Nicolas Cannasse
2003-12-07 11:22 ` Benjamin Geer
2003-12-07 14:12 ` Nicolas Cannasse
2003-12-07 18:04 ` Nuutti Kotivuori [this message]
2003-12-07 10:27 ` Jacques Garrigue
2003-12-07 19:46 ` Nuutti Kotivuori
2003-12-08 1:07 ` Jacques Garrigue
2003-12-08 15:08 ` Nuutti Kotivuori
2003-12-08 15:42 ` Richard Jones
2003-12-09 0:26 ` Nicolas Cannasse
2003-12-09 12:10 ` Nuutti Kotivuori
2003-12-09 13:17 ` Olivier Andrieu
2003-12-09 13:53 ` Nuutti Kotivuori
2003-12-08 17:51 ` Brian Hurt
2003-12-08 18:19 ` brogoff
2003-12-08 20:09 ` Brian Hurt
2003-12-08 19:02 ` Xavier Leroy
2003-12-08 21:37 ` Brian Hurt
2003-12-08 21:06 ` Nuutti Kotivuori
2003-12-08 22:30 ` malc
2003-12-07 18:23 ` Brian Hurt
2003-12-07 18:14 ` Nuutti Kotivuori
2003-12-07 19:30 ` Brian Hurt
2003-12-07 23:50 ` Abdulaziz Ghuloum
2003-12-08 17:29 ` Brian Hurt
2003-12-08 18:48 ` Nuutti Kotivuori
2003-12-08 10:17 ` Nuutti Kotivuori
2003-12-08 19:51 ` 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=87vfoscxn6.fsf@naked.iki.fi \
--to=naked+caml@naked.iki.fi \
--cc=caml-list@inria.fr \
--cc=warplayer@free.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