On Jun 19, 2004, at 3:26 AM, Nicolas FRANCOIS (AKA El Bofo) wrote:

> Le Fri, 18 Jun 2004 10:56:38 +0300 Ville-Pertti Keinonen 
> <will@exomi.com>
> a écrit :

>> I looked at it a bit earlier (when it was posted on LtU), and MLton 
>> and
>> SML/NJ were both ahead of OCaml in the overall scorecard for CPU.
>> There was probably a bug in computing the totals, as the raw scores
>> don't seem to have changed.
>
> They are ahead of the bytecode, not the native code.

They were ahead of the native code, which was between C++ and SML/NJ.  
I even clicked the link and scratched my head over the raw scores, 
which seemed to indicate that it should've had a better overall score.

> Again, it's not a promotion site for OCaml. So don't expect it to 
> present
> Caml better than any other language.

Actually, since the original shootout author is a fan of OCaml, I 
suspect the tests have something of a pro-OCaml bias. ;-)

> So why don't you start your own site, or BETTER : contribute to the 
> work
> allready started ?

Every time I start writing a comparison of programming languages, it 
seems to require the length of a book...

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