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: | Jon Harrop <jon@f...> |
| Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] Comparison of OCaml and MLton for numerics |
On Friday 01 June 2007 12:43:26 Erik de Castro Lopo wrote: > Yaron Minsky wrote: > > I could not agree with this sentiment more. Stephen actually now works > > at Jane Street, and since his arrival he's taught us a number of > > techniques for using modules and functors to organize and factor code > > more > > effectively. Some of these techniques were obviously born in the context > > of Mlton, where they have no performance penalty. It's downright > > annoying to have to avoid these techniques in performance-sensitive code > > in OCaml. In other words, factoring out with functors and modules is > > good style, but OCaml penalizes you for it. > > Can the defunctorizor help? > > http://www.lri.fr/~signoles/ocamldefun/manual.html > > Erik Indeed, after you defunctorize what performance penalties are left by modules? -- Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. OCaml for Scientists http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/ocaml_for_scientists/?e