English version
Accueil     À propos     Téléchargement     Ressources     Contactez-nous    

Ce site est rarement mis à jour. Pour les informations les plus récentes, rendez-vous sur le nouveau site OCaml à l'adresse ocaml.org.

Browse thread
[Caml-list] Dynamically evaluating OCaml code
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: 2004-04-14 (12:20)
From: skaller <skaller@u...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Re: GODI vs. Ocamake
On Wed, 2004-04-14 at 17:50, Nicolas Cannasse wrote:

> Other way of thinking is : what do we need in order to get binary-only
> distributions ? OCaml have a bytecode interpreter, so why we can't release
> libraries simply as a big CMA ( and some CMI's ). Answer : because the
> bytecode binary format is very strict, and not suited for this kind of usage
> (adding a function in the interface of a sub library needs to recompile all
> top librairies ). 

Who cares? 

I've worked on code where turnaround for compilations were:

1970's -- overnight (Fortran)
1980's -- 2-3 hours (Cobol/Pl1)
1990's -- 20-40 minutes (C/C++)
2000's -- 10-60 seconds (Ocaml)

and that's working on large Mainframe (Cyber 70),
Small mainframe (Facom), Medium Sun box,
and 500MHz Pentium III, respectively.

John Skaller, mailto:skaller@users.sf.net
voice: 061-2-9660-0850, 
snail: PO BOX 401 Glebe NSW 2037 Australia
Checkout the Felix programming language http://felix.sf.net

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