Date: Wed, 06 Oct 1999 20:22:51 +1000
From: skaller <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: speed versus C
> The Caml XML parser I wrote was competitive with XML4C (slightly faster),
> and blew XML4J out of the water (10x).
> This was using the native-code compiler.
> The Caml XSL processor I wrote handily beat Java XSL processors.
> My guess is that if you're thinking of writing in C, and you don't
> need low-level access to real memory and such, you will find that CAML
> is more than fast enough.
Thanks for the info: I suspected that this was the case,
quite apart from being easier to develop with.
My biggest problem using ocaml is that I'm still a naive user:
I cannot tell easily which operations will be fast and which will not.
In C/C++ I don't have this problem since I understand many of the
ways in which it is implemented.
-- John Skaller, mailto:email@example.com 1/10 Toxteth Rd Glebe NSW 2037 Australia homepage: http://www.maxtal.com.au/~skaller downloads: http://www.triode.net.au/~skaller
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jan 02 2000 - 11:58:26 MET