From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D3EFBC75 for ; Wed, 16 Feb 2005 11:56:57 +0100 (CET) Received: from will.iki.fi (will.iki.fi [217.169.64.20]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id j1GAuuR9004321 for ; Wed, 16 Feb 2005 11:56:56 +0100 Received: from acerf.exomi.com (fa-3-0-0.fw.exomi.com [217.169.64.99]) by will.iki.fi (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DB1D78; Wed, 16 Feb 2005 12:56:56 +0200 (EET) Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Memory allocation nano-benchmark. From: Ville-Pertti Keinonen To: Jon Harrop Cc: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr In-Reply-To: <200502160954.14157.jon@jdh30.plus.com> References: <420B7A7E.90504@or.uni-bonn.de> <200502152051.55292.jon@jdh30.plus.com> <1108541998.669.22.camel@localhost> <200502160954.14157.jon@jdh30.plus.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 12:56:55 +0200 Message-Id: <1108551415.652.30.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.0.3 FreeBSD GNOME Team Port Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 421326F8.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 wrote:01 compiler:01 abstracted:01 runtime:01 dependencies:01 ocaml:01 dynamic:03 intermediate:03 relies:05 wed:07 elegant:07 elegant:07 nicely:07 seem:07 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 (2004-11-16) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled version=3.0.2 X-Spam-Level: On Wed, 2005-02-16 at 09:54 +0000, Jon Harrop wrote: > Yes, the performance is astonishingly good considering how elegant the > compiler is. I think it relies entirely on the CPU to do dynamic instruction Elegant? My idea of elegant would be something that's nicely abstracted into intermediate representations and passes, introducing runtime dependencies as late as possible, making things straightforward to change etc. My impression of OCaml is that it's an interesting combination of "simplistic" and "hairy". To be fair, the actual machine code generation parts seem fairly nice.