ocaml ast to machine at runtime

ocaml ast to machine at runtime

[Joel Reymont]

I would like to compile trading systems written in a pascal-like  
programming language to OCaml AST at runtime, convert it to machine  
code and use it from the same running
OCaml program (natdynlink?).

Is it possible to do this without having gcc installed?

The code I'm generating will need to be iterate over an array of
doubles or be called from within the loop on every array element. It
will also use a bunch of helper functions from my existing library.

If I generate the code using LLVM then I'll need to write my helper
functions in C and the only value I get from OCaml would be the
parsing. If I write the helper functions in OCaml then I believe my
loop will be slow as hell due to all the wrapping and unwrapping of
OCaml values.

Any suggestions?

     Thanks, Joel

---
http://tinyco.de

Re: ocaml ast to machine at runtime

[Sylvain Le Gall]

On 05-03-2009, Joel Reymont <joelr1@gmail.com> wrote:
> I would like to compile trading systems written in a pascal-like  
> programming language to OCaml AST at runtime, convert it to machine  
> code and use it from the same running
> OCaml program (natdynlink?).
>
> Is it possible to do this without having gcc installed?
>
> The code I'm generating will need to be iterate over an array of
> doubles or be called from within the loop on every array element. It
> will also use a bunch of helper functions from my existing library.
>
> If I generate the code using LLVM then I'll need to write my helper
> functions in C and the only value I get from OCaml would be the
> parsing. If I write the helper functions in OCaml then I believe my
> loop will be slow as hell due to all the wrapping and unwrapping of
> OCaml values.
>
> Any suggestions?

Why not using the LLVM OCaml binding? It is directly shipped with LLVM. 
So you can write the entire generator in OCaml...

Regards,
Sylvain Le Gall

Re: [Caml-list] Re: ocaml ast to machine at runtime

[Joel Reymont]

On Mar 5, 2009, at 3:55 PM, Sylvain Le Gall wrote:

> Why not using the LLVM OCaml binding? It is directly shipped with  
> LLVM.
> So you can write the entire generator in OCaml...


I would love to use LLVM. My concern is the overhead of calling from  
LLVM into OCaml, though. The code I'll be generating will need to make  
use of a library of functions.

I'd prefer to stay in OCaml so this library will need to be wrapped in  
C, if my understanding is correct. This implies manual labor to code  
the wrappers and the runtime overhead to invoke them.

	Thanks, Joel

---
http://tinyco.de
Mac, C++, OCaml