Browse thread
Comparison of OCaml and MLton for numerics
- Yuanchen Zhu
[
Home
]
[ Index:
by date
|
by threads
]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
| Date: | -- (:) |
| From: | skaller <skaller@u...> |
| Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] Comparison of OCaml and MLton for numerics |
On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 15:31 +0800, Yuanchen Zhu wrote: > > > The new running time is: > > > > > > Ocaml (unsafe) : user: 21.477s, real: 23.366s > > > > What is the running time for safe OCaml? > > Safe OCaml adds another 4.5s. > > > > > > which is much in line with MLton: > > > > > > MLton (safe): user: 17.981s, real: 21.968s http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~yzhu/hdrRc.tar.bz2 Results on my box, amd64 single core 3200 Athlon, 1MG, Ubuntu 7.04: remove the -align 8 from mlton, it crashes the experimental build, remove -ffast-math from ocaml, this is not a valid option for 3.10: MLton: 27.15 Unsafe Ocaml: 19.59 Safe Ocaml: 21.38 Note the mlton amd64 build is NOT optimised for machine level performance (it's a bootstrap build being checked for correctness). -- John Skaller <skaller at users dot sf dot net> Felix, successor to C++: http://felix.sf.net