Browse thread
Is OCaml fast?
-
Thanassis Tsiodras
- Gregory Bellier
- Sylvain Le Gall
- Dario Teixeira
- Gerd Stolpmann
- Fabrice Le Fessant
- Oliver Bandel
- Isaac Gouy
- David Allsopp
- Cedric Cellier
- Vincent Aravantinos
- Isaac Gouy
[
Home
]
[ Index:
by date
|
by threads
]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: | 2010-11-22 (16:39) |
From: | Fabrice Le Fessant <fabrice@l...> |
Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] Is OCaml fast? |
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 3:04 PM, Gerd Stolpmann <info@gerd-stolpmann.de> wrote: > So maybe a good opportunity to post better Ocaml solutions there? I spent some time improving OCaml solutions, and most of the time, my solutions were refused: the organizers don't let you unroll loops, fix GC parameters, etc. One strength of OCaml is that it runs fairly fast immediatly, but you can make it run even faster with some tuning, something that you cannot do with many other languages. Such tuning is not allowed there, so, it is not a good place for OCaml hackers. If the organizers had been consistent, they would have forbidden Haskell programmers from adding strictness in their programs, but then, there programs would have been 2x slower than OCaml programs. Well, actually, things might improve in the future, if we manage to improve the performance of the compiler itself, and have more "official" libraries. For example, most parallel solutions in OCaml currently use fork() and sockets for communication. Using an official shared-memory library, we could directly improve the performances of many OCaml solutions. --Fabrice