From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F60CBCAF for ; Thu, 16 Jun 2005 17:42:52 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ptb-relay04.plus.net (ptb-relay02.plus.net [212.159.14.213]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id j5GFgphg020551 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Thu, 16 Jun 2005 17:42:52 +0200 Received: from [80.229.56.224] (helo=chetara) by ptb-relay04.plus.net with esmtp (Exim) id 1DiwW3-0007K1-3J for caml-list@yquem.inria.fr; Thu, 16 Jun 2005 16:42:51 +0100 From: Jon Harrop Organization: Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Mini ray tracer Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2005 16:41:37 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.7.2 References: <200506130346.06550.jon@ffconsultancy.com> <9bbd2794050612202412a79ed2@mail.gmail.com> <200506160720.41452.jon@ffconsultancy.com> In-Reply-To: <200506160720.41452.jon@ffconsultancy.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200506161641.38029.jon@ffconsultancy.com> X-Miltered: at nez-perce with ID 42B19DFB.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 tracer:01 tracer:01 ocamlopt:01 matthias:01 blume:01 bug:01 sml:01 sml:01 matthias:01 ocaml:01 ocaml:01 ingenious:98 denying:98 frog:98 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 Thursday 16 June 2005 07:20, Jon Harrop wrote: > On Monday 13 June 2005 04:24, Alex Goldman wrote: > > > http://www.ffconsultancy.com/free/ray_tracer/languages.html > > > > Thanks. A lot of very interesting stuff there. I'm surprised that > > SMLNJ is as fast as OCamlopt on x86... > > Ahem, it seems that the evil Matthias Blume worked an ingenious bug into > his SML port of my ray tracer which sped it up by 70%. So I've redone the > study and SML is now much less favourable. Matthias is denying all knowledge of this so I guess I'll have to take responsibility myself. Anyhow, I've updated the language comparison with a table comparing OCaml and SML: http://www.ffconsultancy.com/free/ray_tracer/languages.html -- Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. Objective CAML for Scientists http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/ocaml_for_scientists