English version
Accueil     À propos     Téléchargement     Ressources     Contactez-nous    

Ce site est rarement mis à jour. Pour les informations les plus récentes, rendez-vous sur le nouveau site OCaml à l'adresse ocaml.org.

Browse thread
Re: Why OCaml sucks
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: 2008-05-09 (22:24)
From: David Teller <David.Teller@u...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Re: Why OCaml rocks
On Fri, 2008-05-09 at 19:10 +0100, Jon Harrop wrote:
> Parallelism is easy in F#.

Now, that's a cliffhanger. Could you elaborate ?


> > I think that the cost of copying data is totally overrated. We are doing
> > this often, and even over the network, and hey, we are breaking every
> > speed limit.
> You cannot afford to pay that price for parallel implementations of most 
> numerical algorithms.

Er... Not being a specialist, I may be wrong, but I seem to remember
that you can afford that, as long as you're also doing something else
during that copy.

> On the contrary, that is not a theoretical statement at all: it
> already 
> happened. F# already makes it much easier to write high performance
> parallel 
> algorithms and its concurrent GC is the crux of that capability.

Examples ? Pretty please ?


David Teller
 Security of Distributed Systems
 Angry researcher: French Universities need reforms, but the LRU act
brings liquidations.