Sylvain Le Gall <sylv...@le-gall.net> writes:
> On 28-10-2009, Goswin von Brederlow <goswin-...@web.de> wrote:
>> Sylvain Le Gall <sylv...@le-gall.net> writes:
>>> On 28-10-2009, Goswin von Brederlow <goswin-...@web.de> wrote:
>>>> Sylvain Le Gall <sylv...@le-gall.net> writes:
>>>>> On 28-10-2009, Goswin von Brederlow <goswin-...@web.de> wrote:
>>
>>>> PS: Is a.{i} <- x a C call?
>>>
>>> Yes.
>>
>> That obviously sucks. I was hoping since the compiler has a special
>> syntax for it it would be built-in. Bigarray being a seperate module
>> should have clued me in.
>>
>> That obviously speaks against splitting int64 into 8 bytes and calling
>> a.{i} <- x for each.
>>
>> I think I will implement your method and C stubs for every set/get and
>> compare.
>
> This is only the case with int64 array in fact (I really have done test
> and you don't need a C call in most case).
Can I assume you tested on a 32bit cpu?
MfG
Goswin
_______________________________________________
Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management:
http://yquem.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/caml-list
Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs
