Browse thread
RE: [Caml-list] comparison with C performance
- Gregory Morrisett
[
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: | Gregory Morrisett <jgm@C...> |
| Subject: | RE: [Caml-list] comparison with C performance |
>Mark Hayden basically proved that if you properly manage >memory and a few other things, well, you can be faster than C, >unless the C program is (ahem) trivial. Erm, no. The protocol optimizations used in Ensemble were never translated back into C. He compared against an older version (Horus) which used different algorithms and acknowledged that if you translated the ideas from Ensemble back into C, you'd probably get a performance win. They never bothered to do this because the Caml code had acceptable performance. The key thing is that it was too hard to do the restructuring needed to experiment with new approaches to the group communications protocol in C. By coding in Caml, he was able to make massive rearrangements until he got the right algorithm. So, the point is that (a) algorithms matter a lot more than the delta between Caml vs. C, (b) it's easier to experiment with better algorithms in a higher-level language. -Greg ------------------- 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