Version française
Home     About     Download     Resources     Contact us    

This site is updated infrequently. For up-to-date information, please visit the new OCaml website at

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: -- (:)
From: Arthur Chan <baguasquirrel@g...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Re: Why OCaml sucks
> 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.

What do you mean by this?  What language would not incur this kind of
performance hit?  Is F# able to optimize this out or were you referring to
something else?

> Cheers, Kuba
> _______________________________________________
> Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management:
> Archives:
> Beginner's list:
> Bug reports:

(='.'=)This is Bunny. Copy and paste Bunny into your
(")_(")signature to help him gain world domination.