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: 2008-05-12 (13:01)
From: Kuba Ober <ober.14@o...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Re: Why OCaml sucks
> 9. Deforestation: Brian says "Haskell has introduced a very interesting and
> (to my knowledge) unique layer of optimization, called deforrestation".
> True, of course, but useless theoretical piffle because we know that
> Haskell is slow in practice and prohibitively difficult to optimize
> to-boot. Deforesting is really easy to do by hand.

Yet, if you look at things in the light of "optimization is depessimization", 
you'd much rather have easier to read code, than code which is ugly because 
you preoptimized it by hand. This is why, for me, Ocaml has a long way to go 
to make it useful for run-of-the-mill production code. My pet peev is 
performance penalty paid for writing in functional style where it actually 
makes sense -- say passing an arithmetic operator to a map-style function.

Cheers, Kuba