From: Markus Mottl <markus.mottl@gmail.com>
To: Mark Shinwell <mshinwell@janestreet.com>
Cc: Alain Frisch <alain.frisch@lexifi.com>, OCaml List <caml-list@inria.fr>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Status of Flambda in OCaml 4.03
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2016 19:59:12 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAP_800qkSEETKu8bkYY3wDNLfRUVSsecA2Hh3Dp0bt7DYEsF4Q@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAM3Ki75qx_ULu=PdGC08ZAH_oCMGz=M5PjJbDkzEv9tZuxi_LA@mail.gmail.com>
I've just tested Flambda, and it seems to already be doing a pretty
decent job on some non-trivial examples (e.g. inlining combinations of
functors and first class functions). I hope there will be a stable
4.03 OPAM switch that enables it. I'm looking forward to being able
to write more elegant, abstract code that's still efficient.
Regards,
Markus
On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 2:14 AM, Mark Shinwell <mshinwell@janestreet.com> wrote:
> It will not be enabled by default in 4.03. For the majority of
> programs, in the current state, it should improve performance (mainly
> by lowering allocation). It should never generate wrong code.
> However we know of examples that don't improve as much as we would
> like, which we will try to address for 4.04.
>
> There will be a draft version of the new Flambda manual chapter
> available shortly (hopefully this week). Amongst other things this
> documents what you found about the configure options and the flags'
> operation.
>
> Mark
>
> On 9 March 2016 at 03:55, Markus Mottl <markus.mottl@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi Alain,
>>
>> I see, thanks. It was a little confusing, because the command line
>> options for tuning flambda were still available even without Flambda
>> being enabled.
>>
>> Will Flambda be enabled by default in OCaml 4.03 or is it still
>> considered to be too experimental? It could turn out to become one of
>> the most impactful new features in terms of how I write code.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Markus
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 5:53 PM, Alain Frisch <alain.frisch@lexifi.com> wrote:
>>> Hi Markus,
>>>
>>> flambda needs to be enabled explicitly at configure time with the "-flambda"
>>> flag. The new optimizer will then be used unconditionally, and you can
>>> tweak it using command-line parameters passed to ocamlopt (see "ocamlopt
>>> -h").
>>>
>>>
>>> Alain
>>>
>>>
>>> On 08/03/2016 23:10, Markus Mottl wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I'm trying out OCaml 4.03.0+beta1 right now and wanted to test Flambda
>>>> optimizations. But looking at the generated assembly, it doesn't seem
>>>> to be doing much if anything on the simple test examples that I
>>>> thought would benefit.
>>>>
>>>> To give an example of what I expected to see, lets consider this code:
>>>>
>>>> -----
>>>> let map_pair f (x, y) = f x, f y
>>>>
>>>> let succ x = x + 1
>>>> let map_pair_succ1 pair = map_pair succ pair
>>>> let map_pair_succ2 (x, y) = succ x, succ y
>>>> -----
>>>>
>>>> I would have thought that the "succ" function would be inlined in
>>>> "map_pair_succ1" as the compiler would do for "map_pair_succ2".
>>>> But the generated code looks like this:
>>>>
>>>> -----
>>>> L101:
>>>> movq %rax, %rdi
>>>> movq %rdi, 8(%rsp)
>>>> movq %rbx, (%rsp)
>>>> movq 8(%rbx), %rax
>>>> movq (%rdi), %rsi
>>>> movq %rdi, %rbx
>>>> call *%rsi
>>>> L102:
>>>> movq %rax, 16(%rsp)
>>>> movq (%rsp), %rax
>>>> movq (%rax), %rax
>>>> movq 8(%rsp), %rbx
>>>> movq (%rbx), %rdi
>>>> call *%rdi
>>>> -----
>>>>
>>>> Is Flambda supposed to work out of the box with the current beta?
>>>> What flags or annotations should I use for testing? Any showcase
>>>> examples I should try out that are expected to be improved?
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Markus
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Markus Mottl http://www.ocaml.info markus.mottl@gmail.com
>>
>> --
>> Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management and archives:
>> https://sympa.inria.fr/sympa/arc/caml-list
>> Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners
>> Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs
--
Markus Mottl http://www.ocaml.info markus.mottl@gmail.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-03-10 0:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-03-08 22:10 Markus Mottl
2016-03-08 22:53 ` Alain Frisch
2016-03-09 3:55 ` Markus Mottl
2016-03-09 7:14 ` Mark Shinwell
2016-03-10 0:59 ` Markus Mottl [this message]
2016-03-10 1:32 ` Yotam Barnoy
2016-03-10 1:43 ` Markus Mottl
2016-03-10 7:20 ` Mark Shinwell
2016-03-10 15:32 ` Markus Mottl
2016-03-10 15:49 ` Gabriel Scherer
2016-04-17 8:43 ` Jesper Louis Andersen
2016-04-17 8:59 ` Mohamed Iguernlala
2016-04-17 15:43 ` Markus Mottl
2016-03-10 20:12 ` [Caml-list] <DKIM> " Pierre Chambart
2016-03-10 21:08 ` Markus Mottl
2016-03-10 22:51 ` Gerd Stolpmann
2016-03-11 8:59 ` Mark Shinwell
2016-03-11 9:05 ` Mark Shinwell
2016-03-11 9:09 ` Alain Frisch
2016-03-11 9:26 ` Mark Shinwell
2016-03-11 14:48 ` Yotam Barnoy
2016-03-11 15:09 ` Jesper Louis Andersen
2016-03-11 16:58 ` Markus Mottl
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=CAP_800qkSEETKu8bkYY3wDNLfRUVSsecA2Hh3Dp0bt7DYEsF4Q@mail.gmail.com \
--to=markus.mottl@gmail.com \
--cc=alain.frisch@lexifi.com \
--cc=caml-list@inria.fr \
--cc=mshinwell@janestreet.com \
/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