skaller wrote:

> Now Gerd, I would not call the claim nonsense. If you can't
> use a data structure in a natural way, I'd say the claim indeed
> has some weight.

The original claim was:

>> I heard that OCaml is particularly slow (and probably memory-inefficient)
>> when it comes to string manipulation. What is the preferred way in handling
>> strings (building long strings from short parts - something StringBuilder
>> would be used in Java)? Does anybody have any experience concerning this
>> kind of applications?

ie comparing Ocaml string handling to Java and other web languages like
php, perl, ruby and python.

While I agree that yes, it is possible to write slow code in Ocaml
(or any other language), I suspect that idiomatic Ocaml string handling
compiled to a binary is just as fast if not faster than Java/Perl/Python/
Ruby/PHP/whatever.

Erik
-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Erik de Castro Lopo
-----------------------------------------------------------------
"Windows was created to keep stupid people away from UNIX."
  -- Tom Christiansen