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
Ray tracer language comparison
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: 2005-10-09 (18:07)
From: Thomas Fischbacher <Thomas.Fischbacher@P...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Ray tracer language comparison

On Sun, 9 Oct 2005, Florian Weimer wrote:

> * Thomas Fischbacher:
> > I just extended my analysis by another implementation in yet another 
> > language. This time, it's "Steel Bank Common Lisp".
> Is this some kind of elaborate hoax?  If it is, I don't get it?
> "OCaml" vs. "Objective Caml", "SBCL" vs. "Steel Bank Common Lisp",
> "1/8" vs. "1/10" -- all these comparisons are a bit strange.

All the numbers and measurements on my page are for real. As well as all 
statements concerning my testing environment. And I am using precisely the 
same diligence with my studies as Jon does with his.

regards,                   (o_
 Thomas Fischbacher -  //\
(lambda (n) ((lambda (p q r) (p p q r)) (lambda (g x y)           V_/_
(if (= x 0) y (g g (- x 1) (* x y)))) n 1))                  (Debian GNU)