Re: [Caml-list] Executable size?

[skaller <skaller@ozemail.com.au>]

On Fri, 2003-11-14 at 02:43, Eric Dahlman wrote:
> John J Lee wrote:

> My point was that if you are making these sorts of comparisons you 
> cannot just *ignore* the runtime in the C/C++ case and more importantly 
> that C and O'Caml are not fundamentally different in this regard.  By 
> definition it is impossible to write a program in C or C++ which does 
> not use the respective runtime, it cannot be ignored.

That is not true for C, unless you are pedantic and refer to ISO C,
and even then, ISO C has a concept of 'hosted' and 'non-hosted'
systems, with the requirements for non-hosted systems
being considerably less.

A very large number of people do in fact build C all the
time without any runtime library at all: embedded systems
typically don't use any runtime.

You can also do this for C++, even g++ can do it I think
by turning off support for features that require run
time support such as exception handling.

Ocaml on the other hand cannot function at all without the gc.


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