Browse thread
Re: [Caml-list] productivity improvement
[
Home
]
[ Index:
by date
|
by threads
]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
| Date: | -- (:) |
| From: | Jeffrey Palmer <jeffrey.palmer@a...> |
| Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] productivity improvement |
Hello all. I have a request. Can we please cease the C++ flamefest? Some of us are not able to choose our implementation language quite as easily as others, and, frankly, endless discussions about language X's failings just irritate the people that are forced to use X daily. Making blanket statements like "language X clearly isn't good for anything" is just ridiculous - nothing is ever that clear cut. If we were to talk about the aspects of C++ (or Java, or ...) that we could apply to ocaml, that might be a different story (there might not be many!) For my part, I'm under the impression that cross-module functor specializations (terminology?) in ocaml, akin to C++ template instantiation, are not optimized in the same manner as C++ templates (compiled away). Is this true? This is a killer for me, as I can't even afford the overhead of a function call (don't ask). I would love to be able to write my product in ocaml, and plop a C++ wrapper on top of it, but practicalities unfortunately make this an impossibility. I need to do things similar to Blitz, which I suppose dooms me to template hell. ;) - j -- The river is moving. The blackbird must be flying. ------------------- 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