Yo,
I don't know if this helps, but I can create arbitrary compilation times with
very small code samples:
let sink (a,f) = f a
let base = ()
let finish () = ()
let step () = ()
let fold (a,f) g = g (a,f)
let step0 h (a,f) = fold (h a,f)
let f z = fold (base, finish) z
let a z = step0 step
On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 12:11:51PM +0400, SerP wrote:
We encountered a problem of a slow compilation. When the project grew up,
the time of compilation increased considerably. We have many classes and
objects, and the type checking of objects and classes performs very slowly.
I have Core i3
We encountered a problem of a slow compilation. When the project grew up,
the time of compilation increased considerably. We have many classes and
objects, and the type checking of objects and classes performs very slowly.
I have Core i3 3GHz iMac, and the average compilation time of one module is
I can't comment on the type-checker internals, but a general first
step would be to make sure that you don't recompile things that you
don't need to.
If you change the *implementation* of a module without changing its
interface, you should not have to recompile any other module, at least
when
Hi,
On 11/03/2012, Gabriel Scherer gabriel.sche...@gmail.com wrote:
I can't comment on the type-checker internals, but a general first
step would be to make sure that you don't recompile things that you
don't need to.
There's another easy thing to try: using .opt version of the ocaml
When working with ocamlduce (a few years ago) the same problem was
raised. A simple thing that can greatly reduce typing time is putting
explicit type annotations. Although the verbosity is increased it is
not that much of a burden if the annotated parts do not evolve too
much.
The same probably
