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
[Caml-list] Executable size?
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: 2003-11-13 (01:30)
From: Oleg Trott <oleg_trott@c...>
Subject: [Caml-list] F-sharp (was: Executable size?)
On Wednesday 12 November 2003 07:26 pm, Karl Zilles wrote:
> John J Lee wrote:
> > Well, I guess they already have, in the sense that O'Caml has a .NET
> > implementation -- right?  Always assuming that implementation is more
> > than the publicity stunt that the Python one was, of course...
> You're referring to F#.  It appears to be more of a research project
> than a full fledged implementation:
> http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=fa.qe3mh18.1p1m8jk%40ifi.uio.no

Cc: Don Syme

I'm curious why F# (as I understood it), implements Caml from scratch instead 
of just changing the bytecode compiler in Caml a bit to suite its needs.

By the way, are there benchmarks comparing code produced by ocamlc, ocamlopt 
and F# (together with SML.NET and SML/NJ for that matter) on a variety of 
algorithm and numerics-intensive tasks?

IIRC, when .NET/C# just came out, there were claims that it was almost as fast 
as C.
Oleg Trott <oleg_trott@columbia.edu>

To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners