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 mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.82]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBB0BBBAF for ; Mon, 22 Nov 2010 18:54:16 +0100 (CET) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AkUDAAc96kzCpx5ei2dsb2JhbACiYBUBAQEKCwoYIr1mhUsEjWwa X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.59,237,1288566000"; d="scan'208";a="89112319" Received: from sucre.univ-orleans.fr ([194.167.30.94]) by mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 22 Nov 2010 18:54:16 +0100 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sucre.univ-orleans.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 254AD94392; Mon, 22 Nov 2010 18:54:17 +0100 (CET) Received: from sucre.univ-orleans.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (sucre.univ-orleans.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fMrn5Q9+7nnA; Mon, 22 Nov 2010 18:54:17 +0100 (CET) Received: from smtps.univ-orleans.fr (smtps.univ-orleans.fr [194.167.30.152]) by sucre.univ-orleans.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A1799435C; Mon, 22 Nov 2010 18:54:17 +0100 (CET) Received: from [192.168.1.186] (unknown [213.144.210.93]) by smtps.univ-orleans.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF25136E60; Mon, 22 Nov 2010 18:54:19 +0100 (CET) Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Is OCaml fast? Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1082) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: David Rajchenbach-Teller In-Reply-To: <20101122182338.3867381u5h2p4f8a@webmail.in-berlin.de> Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2010 18:54:15 +0100 Cc: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <1D2A22FF-AA5A-4A7B-8F3B-DC47834EC9F6@univ-orleans.fr> References: <1290434674.16005.354.camel@thinkpad> <20101122180203.2126497sau3zukgb@webmail.in-berlin.de> <20101122182338.3867381u5h2p4f8a@webmail.in-berlin.de> To: "Oliver Bandel" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1082) X-Spam: no; 0.00; ocaml:01 univ-orleans:01 bandel:01 wrote:01 oliver:01 caml-list:01 languages:03 quite:08 looks:08 i'm:09 david:14 david:14 nov:17 too:17 same:17 Note: I'm not saying that they are biased. It's quite possible they did = the same thing for other languages, too, I didn't take the time to = check. On Nov 22, 2010, at 6:23 PM, Oliver Bandel wrote: >=20 > ...hmhhh.. >=20 > ...looks like they are biased... >=20 >=20 > .... not that we are not ;)