From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.83]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id F35BDBC59 for ; Mon, 22 Nov 2010 15:04:38 +0100 (CET) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AkYBAB8H6kzU4367kGdsb2JhbACDSp8LFQEBAQEJCQwHEQMfiCujV5BIAoEggzZzBIcNhl8 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.59,236,1288566000"; d="scan'208";a="80694069" Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.187]) by mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 22 Nov 2010 15:04:38 +0100 Received: from office1.lan.sumadev.de (dslb-094-219-216-091.pools.arcor-ip.net [94.219.216.91]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (node=mrbap0) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0MaV5d-1P0vnB1797-00KCIx; Mon, 22 Nov 2010 15:04:36 +0100 Received: from [192.168.5.106] (dslb-094-219-216-091.pools.arcor-ip.net [94.219.216.91]) by office1.lan.sumadev.de (Postfix) with ESMTPA id E43D25F701; Mon, 22 Nov 2010 15:04:35 +0100 (CET) Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Is OCaml fast? From: Gerd Stolpmann To: Thanassis Tsiodras Cc: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2010 15:04:34 +0100 Message-ID: <1290434674.16005.354.camel@thinkpad> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.28.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Provags-ID: V02:K0:3Cugy22s/7QxUabEbt8lqns2KwNL1kKQy2DXcOefNGx Y81FdqkP/eqfxuZpjAYdtcwueoJ2Vb+XIhTiwnicK7iKHFDMpF payZ3m6okjjJ97YxZVVydceGUoJnMtN7rpaAXU43FShfBSdPzL PrS0rqb6k4DTA3rDGSAR0WjNIytb7HwWAEVhTvHgKl2HiflK2G ZzAp+eYr7A+4Yv+XRp0IQ== X-Spam: no; 0.00; ocaml:01 gerd:01 stolpmann:01 ocaml:01 haskell:01 gerd:01 stolpmann:01 darmstadt:01 6151:01 6151:01 ubc:98 caml-list:01 executables:01 data:02 shootout:02 Am Montag, den 22.11.2010, 15:21 +0200 schrieb Thanassis Tsiodras: > I apologize beforehand if this is not the forum to ask. > > I am on the fence about whether to learn OCaml or not, and while > reading an article called "Why OCaml" > (http://www.cs.ubc.ca/~murphyk/Software/Ocaml/why_ocaml.html), I saw > that OCaml was praised for the speed of the executables it generates - > and was referred to, speed-wise, as "second to none", except C and > C++. > > However, when I actually went to the Language Shootout page suggested > in the article, I found out that OCaml is not 2nd, it is 13th, behind > languages like Haskell and C#... > (http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/u32/which-programming-languages-are-fastest.php) > > Is it just hype, then? Or am I missing something? I think the shootout is not a good data source. There are definitely some very poor Ocaml results there, so I'd guess the shootout got recently more attention by enthusiasts of other languages, and the current Ocaml programs there are not very good. (I remember Ocaml was #1 at the shootout a few years ago, faster than C.) So maybe a good opportunity to post better Ocaml solutions there? Gerd -- ------------------------------------------------------------ Gerd Stolpmann, Bad Nauheimer Str.3, 64289 Darmstadt,Germany gerd@gerd-stolpmann.de http://www.gerd-stolpmann.de Phone: +49-6151-153855 Fax: +49-6151-997714 ------------------------------------------------------------