> I believe that the Stalin compiler for Scheme, which is a whole program
> compiler (you give up separate compilation) has done better than C on some
> much more significant programs than fibonacci. I suspect that any compiler
> which abandons separate compilation and does aggressive whole program
> analysis may have problems with extremely large programs, but I don't have
> evidence to back this up.
>
> I presume that a similar compiler for an ML variant could be written. Given
> that the Caml team has limited resources, I'd rather they spend them
> elsewhere, as I am satisfied with the performance of OCaml for the problems
> I apply it to. I realize that others have different priorities.
In fact, researchers at NECI have developed a whole-program Standard ML
compiler, called MLton. You can read about it at
http://external.nj.nec.com/PLS/MLton/
In general, its programs run 2-3x faster than SML/NJ, but occasionally they
are a bit slower.
Mike
-- Michael Hicks Ph.D. Candidate, the University of Pennsylvania http://www.cis.upenn.edu/~mwh mailto://mwh@dsl.cis.upenn.edu "Every time someone asks me to do something, I ask if they want French fries with that." -- testimonial of a former McDonald's employee
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Apr 19 2000 - 21:02:33 MET DST