From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <jonathandeanharrop@googlemail.com>
X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr
Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr
Received: from mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.82])
	by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91888BBAF
	for <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>; Thu, 25 Nov 2010 23:12:03 +0100 (CET)
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AosBAMNt7kxKfVI0kGdsb2JhbACVCIEkjFsIFQEBAQEJCQwHEQMfpXeLfAEFjVABBIVH
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.59,256,1288566000"; 
   d="scan'208";a="89393456"
Received: from mail-ww0-f52.google.com ([74.125.82.52])
  by mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 25 Nov 2010 23:12:03 +0100
Received: by mail-ww0-f52.google.com with SMTP id 17so1300679wwb.9
        for <caml-list@inria.fr>; Thu, 25 Nov 2010 14:12:03 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=googlemail.com; s=gamma;
        h=domainkey-signature:received:received:from:to:references
         :in-reply-to:subject:date:organization:message-id:mime-version
         :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:x-mailer:thread-index
         :content-language;
        bh=BzZEORDmYlDRC7aVxoLBFeCAMW4HX8PhkEqT655PMQs=;
        b=hKw+0Jxh5rsrzwToYtHS/DbMn6XXZo1YZdr3VZNbaey3lZ0xfkPcsjoWXiSTzZh9mD
         B+65wdVbFDuHwwlUQHkuiwx2udk103cJHzSl7VZNzDtluiLkt4Np75xZYKx3JRSaIH9k
         zAxeQ6MFq3Uxvv7DUY3gcLIFT/pMTNsl2l2Gc=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=googlemail.com; s=gamma;
        h=from:to:references:in-reply-to:subject:date:organization:message-id
         :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:x-mailer
         :thread-index:content-language;
        b=JNgqAL8IDjE9kk54UNFT5HPWYuPXUE7M+gM9eOWjzfoOkCrvwxICUUJWfreScU7A45
         G1NO/gwuKz2r5FYGGbDJXeBK/Y/QWcDRNBcVq1Bj7gfttSrVyyt5zrAQITzE0DmX6a4h
         GfKf5VdcVeRjxureci/TvnTNCdh3os1yPCxHo=
Received: by 10.227.151.69 with SMTP id b5mr1525323wbw.168.1290723123138;
        Thu, 25 Nov 2010 14:12:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: from WinEight ([87.113.160.118])
        by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id ga16sm832823wbb.7.2010.11.25.14.12.01
        (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5);
        Thu, 25 Nov 2010 14:12:02 -0800 (PST)
From: Jon Harrop <jonathandeanharrop@googlemail.com>
To: <caml-list@inria.fr>
References: <AANLkTi=MFt3mGK2L_o=4=o=3FOtA2onvdvqTpw9SObYP@mail.gmail.com>	<1290434674.16005.354.camel@thinkpad>	<20101122180203.2126497sau3zukgb@webmail.in-berlin.de>	<E0E134FB-BF3D-4CF2-8214-12322034662D@univ-orleans.fr>	<loom.20101123T030109-899@post.gmane.org>	<20101123232742.GC28768@siouxsie>	<loom.20101124T011919-47@post.gmane.org>	<AANLkTi=9BnGCEftg_TAaeY8s3cNnmzHuw2-UxuCX2oKX@mail.gmail.com>	<loom.20101124T031035-994@post.gmane.org>	<AANLkTik_j=H+1JPTmreYL2UVBn_CHWMrMjsABW7ZBL5Q@mail.gmail.com> <jwv39qp2vn4.fsf-monnier+gmane.comp.lang.caml.inria@gnu.org>
In-Reply-To: <jwv39qp2vn4.fsf-monnier+gmane.comp.lang.caml.inria@gnu.org>
Subject: RE: [Caml-list] Re: Is OCaml fast?
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2010 22:11:31 -0000
Organization: Flying Frog Consultancy
Message-ID: <07e301cb8ced$b91f11b0$2b5d3510$@com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0
Thread-Index: AcuMwjRZuN4x++LWQBa5mYNSDRDKPAAFsUuw
Content-Language: en-gb
X-Spam: no; 0.00; ocaml:01 ocaml's:01 ocaml:01 ad-hoc:01 cheers:01 glass:98 ceiling:98 wrote:01 caml-list:01 benchmark:04 problem:05 hiding:08 rules:11 necessarily:12 optimize:12 

Stefan wrote:
> I think OCaml's
> problem with this benchmark do point at a weakness of the current
> GC code.

A difference but not necessarily a weakness. OCaml makes performance
transparent and gives you the ability to improve it with a high glass
ceiling. I prefer that to hiding the controls and using ad-hoc rules to
tweak things behind your back, rendering performance unpredictable and
making it hard to optimize your code.

Cheers,
Jon.