Version française
Home     About     Download     Resources     Contact us    

This site is updated infrequently. For up-to-date information, please visit the new OCaml website at

Browse thread
[Caml-list] Alternative Bytecodes for OCaml
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: 2004-08-29 (04:54)
From: Brandon J. Van Every <vanevery@i...>
Subject: RE: [Caml-list] Re: (GC issues) Alternative Bytecodes for OCaml
John Skaller wrote:
> > Basile Starynkevitch [local] wrote:
> > This interesting discussion triggers another interesting question:
> > would Ocaml coders still use Ocaml if its implementation was (say) 3
> > or 10 times slower than the current implementation?
> Yes they would. John Goerzen already made that quite clear:
> there are plenty of times when performance just isn't the issue.

Some would.  Perhaps those who are already converted on the grounds of
type safety or features or so forth.  Those of us shopping around for
various kinds of 'replacement languages' would be using Python.  That
is, if OCaml were indeed that slow and no other OCaml-like options were
available in open source land.  Without performance, I think Python's
critical mass and ease of use will easily beat OCaml in the marketplace.
The promise of OCaml is really performance and scale-up, areas that
Python is weak at.

You can argue all you like about what OCaml does that Python doesn't do;
strategically, it is irrelevant.  Look at the languages the world
actually uses en masse, if you want to understand what I mean.  The
point is that performance does matter.

Not really interested in debating this here, just adding my $0.02.  If
you want to debate what makes languages succeed or fail, we'd welcome
your input on ocaml-biz.

Brand*n Van Every               S*attle, WA

Praise Be to the caml-list Bayesian filter! It blesseth
my postings, it is evil crap!  evil crap!  Bigarray!
Unboxed overhead group!  Wondering!  chant chant chant...

Is my technical content showing?

// return an array of 100 packed tuples
  int $[tvar0][2*100]; // what the c function needs
  value $[tvar1]; // one int
  value $[tvar2]; // one tuple
  int $[tvar3] // loop control var
  $[lvar0] = alloc(2*100, 0 /*NB: zero-tagged block*/ );
  for(int $[tvar3]=0;$[tvar3]<100;$[tvar3]++) {
    $[tvar2] = alloc_tuple(2);
    $[tvar1] = Val_int($[cvar0][0+2*$[tvar3]]);
    $[tvar1] = Val_int($[cvar0][1]);

To unsubscribe, mail Archives:
Bug reports: FAQ:
Beginner's list: