caml-list - the Caml user's mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ville-Pertti Keinonen <will@exomi.com>
To: Brian Hurt <bhurt@spnz.org>
Cc: Ocaml Mailing List <caml-list@inria.fr>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Great Programming Language Shootout Revived
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 10:56:38 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <06D9583C-C0FD-11D8-8AC7-000393863F70@exomi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0406171237270.4305-100000@localhost.localdomain>


On Jun 17, 2004, at 9:05 PM, Brian Hurt wrote:

> board is pretty damned good- we're beating both Java and C++ across the
> board, in fact the only other language that comes close to Ocaml's
> performance is, unsurprisingly, version of SML- MLton and SML/NJ).  
> But if

I looked at it a bit earlier (when it was posted on LtU), and MLton and 
SML/NJ were both ahead of OCaml in the overall scorecard for CPU.  
There was probably a bug in computing the totals, as the raw scores 
don't seem to have changed.

Anyhow, the shootout seems, like most benchmarks, to be misleading and 
arbitrary.  The language features compared are not really equivalent.  
E.g. C, C++ and Ada should be approximately the same in performance for 
code that doesn't compare their libraries or exception models.  Despite 
doing things like disabling array index checks, it seems some of the 
Ada benchmarks don't even use types equivalent to the C versions.

OCaml does have good performance characteristics - decent overall code 
generation, fast exceptions, fast memory allocation and a simple, 
lightweight standard library - but most of the benchmarks in the 
shootout are simply bogus for many of the languages.  They can be 
useful if you compare the performance of specific languages in specific 
benchmarks, as long as you look at the code as well to see what it is 
that's really being compared.

A more interesting way to compare programming languages might be to see 
what programming techniques are possible (and efficient) in different 
languages and how well suited they are for different tasks.  As you've 
noted, no one language is good at everything.  One reason I like OCaml 
is that it makes a reasonable range of techniques efficient, and it 
doesn't have DSLish characteristics.

-------------------
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


  parent reply	other threads:[~2004-06-18  7:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-06-17 18:05 Brian Hurt
2004-06-18  1:18 ` Yaron Minsky
2004-06-18  9:37   ` Sebastien Ferre
2004-06-18 15:45     ` Brian Hurt
2004-06-18 21:39       ` Eray Ozkural
2004-06-18  6:09 ` Brandon J. Van Every
2004-06-18  7:56 ` Ville-Pertti Keinonen [this message]
2004-06-18  8:59   ` skaller
2004-06-18  9:57     ` Ville-Pertti Keinonen
2004-06-18 10:48       ` Implementing DSLs in OCaml/CamlP4 (was: Re: [Caml-list] Great Programming Language Shootout Revived) Richard Jones
2004-06-18 12:32         ` Walid Taha
2004-06-18 15:38   ` [Caml-list] Great Programming Language Shootout Revived Brian Hurt
2004-06-18 17:07     ` David Brown
2004-06-19  0:26   ` Nicolas FRANCOIS
2004-06-19  9:04     ` [Caml-list] Benchmark suggestion (Was: Programming Language Shootout) Wolfgang Müller
2004-06-19 10:54       ` Ville-Pertti Keinonen
2004-06-19 19:38       ` [Caml-list] Benchmark suggestion Brandon J. Van Every
2004-06-19 20:08         ` Brian Hurt
2004-06-19 20:16         ` Wolfgang Müller
2004-06-20 11:24           ` [Caml-list] Evangelism Brandon J. Van Every
2004-06-19 11:18     ` [Caml-list] Great Programming Language Shootout Revived Ville-Pertti Keinonen
2004-06-19 11:56     ` Nicolas Janin
2004-06-19 12:51       ` Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk
2004-06-19 19:46         ` Brandon J. Van Every
2004-06-19 20:19           ` Brian Hurt
2004-06-19 12:09     ` Nicolas Janin
2004-06-19 12:48       ` John Hughes
2004-06-19 18:57       ` Brian Hurt

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=06D9583C-C0FD-11D8-8AC7-000393863F70@exomi.com \
    --to=will@exomi.com \
    --cc=bhurt@spnz.org \
    --cc=caml-list@inria.fr \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).