>However, for casual coding a la Matlab style, the lack of overloading 
>could be seen as a problem. Of course one must then be prepared to live 
>with unnecessary copying and memory accesses.

Of course, that's why I said "look nice and pretty for numerical code" not 
"be efficient".  There are times when you want blas-style functions for 
efficiency, and times when you want to write d = (a + b) * (c - b).  Caml 
can't do the latter [very cleanly].  That was my point.

Saying the latter isn't necessary or desired is the same type of argument 
people use against other high-level language features (gc, etc.).  When 
programming, most of my time is spent figuring out what I want to do and 
how, it is not spent optimizing (and I write games, which are notoriously 
prematurely optimized).  Once I figure something out, then I'll optimize it 
if necessary.  Blas-style functions inhibit rapid prototyping and 
experimentation, while expression-syntax-style operators inhibit 
efficiency.  I want to be able to use both, each at the appropriate time.

That's why I wish Ocaml supported the latter better.

Chris


-------------------
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