Version française
Home     About     Download     Resources     Contact us    
Browse thread
[Caml-list] ocaml-3.05: a performance experience
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: -- (:)
From: Alexander V.Voinov <avv@q...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] ocaml-3.05: a performance experience
Hi All,

It looks like it's time to introduce continuations in OCaml :-).

Alexander

From: "Mike Lin" <mikelin@MIT.EDU>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] ocaml-3.05: a performance experience
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2002 12:24:07 -0400

> 
> > I'm intrigued by the relationship between these two parsers. In
> particular,
> > note that my Felix compiler takes 'pull' code, and automatically
> > translates it
> > to the much more efficient 'push' model: ie. it switches the client/server
> > relationship around, a process I call control inversion.
> 
> I'm just curious if you could elaborate on in what respect a push parser is
> "much more efficient"? From my experience pull parsers tend to be easier to
> use because they don't impose an event-driven model on the driver program,
> and also it is trivial to build a push parser on top of a pull parser.
> 
> -Mike
> 
> -------------------
> 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
> 
-------------------
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