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: | David MENTRE <dmentre@l...> |
| Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] Comparison of OCaml and MLton for numerics |
Hello, 2007/6/1, Yaron Minsky <yminsky@cs.cornell.edu>: > In other words, > factoring out with functors and modules is good style, but OCaml penalizes > you for it. A naive and somewhat provocative question: is the performance penalty a real issue in your production code or just a known overhead that is easily solved by having a more powerful computer? In other words, is the complexity price of better optimizations justified considering its real impact in production code? And if you consider this debate in a more general view: OCaml has a number of known deficiencies that pop up regularly on this list (new calmp4 doc, handling of parallelism for multi-core machines, lack of a recognised CPAN-like OCaml repository, etc.). We all know that the INRIA team has limited manpower. On which topic should they invest their time? How can we work, as a community, to solve those issues? Yours, david