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] The Bytecode Interpreter...
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: 2005-10-22 (18:31)
From: Oliver Bandel <oliver@f...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] The Bytecode Interpreter...
On Sat, Oct 22, 2005 at 11:24:10AM +1300, Jonathan Roewen wrote:
> I've noted on the computer language shootout that ocaml bytecode is
> slow compared to Java. I'm curious, are there any plans to optimise
> the shit out of the bytecode interpreter? I know it has been a goal to
> not be much more than 1.3x slower than C -- but this only covers
> ocamlopt/native code. Don't you think bytecode should have some
> endeavour to match or better some other language too (Java seems best
> case to me in this scenario).
> About the only thing the shootout proves is that ocaml bytecode has
> very good memory use compared to Java.

You will have the best performance and maybe the best memory
usage, when writing all your programs in Assembler.

Well, I really like fast langauges, but performance is not all
(even if all is nothing when the performance is bad).

Is performance the only or the biggest thing you look for,
when deciding fo a programming langauge?