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 WAA10246; Tue, 1 Apr 2003 22:45:52 +0200 (MET DST) 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 WAA10465 for ; Tue, 1 Apr 2003 22:45:50 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from mail.exomi.com (mail.exomi.com [217.169.64.72]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id h31Kjn503561 for ; Tue, 1 Apr 2003 22:45:49 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from exomi.com (unknown [10.0.5.5]) by mail.exomi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37DDC5D03; Tue, 1 Apr 2003 23:45:49 +0300 (EEST) Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2003 23:45:48 +0300 Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Bug? Printf, %X and negative numbers Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v551) Cc: To: Brian Hurt From: Ville-Pertti Keinonen In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.551) X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 bug:01 printf:01 intuitively:01 biased:01 inherently:01 necessarily:02 overhead:03 probably:05 structures:05 guess:06 i'm:07 snipped:08 operations:08 language:10 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk > For structures 32 words or less, you can do it like (using x86 assembly > language here): ...actual code snipped... Ok, that's not necessarily too bad. I guess I was just intuitively dismissing anything that felt like it had more than a couple of instructions of "overhead". I'm probably also biased by SMP-thinking - read-modify-write operations feel inherently evil. ;-) ------------------- 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