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 OAA01881; Wed, 7 Jul 2004 14:34:49 +0200 (MET DST) 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 OAA02034; Wed, 7 Jul 2004 14:34:48 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from shiva.jussieu.fr (shiva.jussieu.fr [134.157.0.129]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i67CYlSH009265; Wed, 7 Jul 2004 14:34:47 +0200 Received: from ibm3.cicrp.jussieu.fr (ibm3.cicrp.jussieu.fr [134.157.15.3]) by shiva.jussieu.fr (8.12.11/jtpda-5.4) with ESMTP id i67CYk0p076248 ; Wed, 7 Jul 2004 14:34:46 +0200 (CEST) X-Ids: 168 Received: from ibm1.cicrp.jussieu.fr (ibm1.cicrp.jussieu.fr [134.157.15.1]) by ibm3.cicrp.jussieu.fr (8.8.8/jtpda/mob-V8) with ESMTP id OAB133836 ; Wed, 7 Jul 2004 14:32:51 +0200 Received: from localhost (fernande@localhost) by ibm1.cicrp.jussieu.fr (8.8.8/jtpda/mob-v8) with ESMTP id OAA188538 ; Wed, 7 Jul 2004 14:32:57 +0200 X-Authentication-Warning: ibm1.cicrp.jussieu.fr: fernande owned process doing -bs Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2004 14:32:56 +0200 (DST) From: Diego Olivier Fernandez Pons X-X-Sender: fernande@ibm1 To: "Basile Starynkevitch [local]" cc: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Does Caml have slow arithmetics ? In-Reply-To: <20040707091308.GA26172@bourg.inria.fr> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 40EBEDE7.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Miltered: at shiva.jussieu.fr with ID 40EBEDE6.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Antivirus: scanned by sophie at shiva.jussieu.fr X-Loop: caml-list@inria.fr X-Spam: no; 0.00; pons:01 pons:01 etu:99 caml-list:01 arithmetics:01 subsidiary:99 silently:01 fernandez:01 fernandez:01 tagged:01 ints:01 caml:01 int:01 simpler:01 olivier:02 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk Bonjour > In principle yes, because int values are represented as tagged > (31bits) ints (with the LSB set to 1). So conversion is a shift > followed by an addition (or viceversa). Subsidiary question : why LSB instead of MSB ? I thought it would be simpler to let the computations silently overflow and correct when necessary the tag bit. Diego Olivier ------------------- 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