Version française
Home     About     Download     Resources     Contact us    
Browse thread
native vs bytecode
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: -- (:)
From: Peng Zang <peng.zang@g...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] native vs bytecode
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

What do you mean by "dynamically load"?

You cannot mix native and bytecode generally speaking.

I don't know of any speed comparisons of OCaml bytecode.  You can always 
compile to native code, which is faster, so I don't understand why you would 
want to run anything large with bytecode.

Peng

On Wednesday 06 August 2008 03:58:22 pm Ben Aurel wrote:
> hi
> As I try to acquire more knowledge about Ocaml I made a bit of an
> unpleseant discovery today. I always was fascinated by the execution
> performance of Ocaml. But now I've learned, that this is only true for
> native binaries and I'm a little confused now:
>
> - is it possible to dynamically load native libraries into a native
> program?
>
> - is it possible to dynamically load bytecode libraries into a native
> program?
>
> - is it possible to dynamically load native libraries into a bytecode
> program?
>
> - is it possible to dynamically load bytecode libraries into a bytecode
> program?
>
> - Are there any performance test that shows how bytecode programs
> stack up agains dynamic languages like ruby, perl and python?
>
> thanks
> ben
>
> _______________________________________________
> Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management:
> http://yquem.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/caml-list
> Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
> Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners
> Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFImgUCfIRcEFL/JewRAnvkAJ4/55GKZjoZF40z2J7LDOvChKZQ+gCbBbws
gGAKM/WB1OFovWdowvrjQxk=
=xX5E
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----