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 concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 241E8BB9A for ; Wed, 5 Oct 2005 00:10:22 +0200 (CEST) Received: from first.in-berlin.de (dialin-145-254-061-129.pools.arcor-ip.net [145.254.61.129]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id j94MAKaT003201 for ; Wed, 5 Oct 2005 00:10:21 +0200 Received: by first.in-berlin.de (Postfix, from userid 501) id 9926516420B; Tue, 4 Oct 2005 18:47:00 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 18:47:00 +0200 From: Oliver Bandel To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Subject: FP/IP and performance (in general) and Patterns... (Re: [Caml-list] Avoiding shared data) Message-ID: <20051004164700.GA494@first.in-berlin.de> References: <20051003200337.14092.qmail@web26809.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <1128394430.23813.20.camel@rosella> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 4342FDCC.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; oliver:01 bandel:01 oliver:01 in-berlin:01 caml-list:01 avoiding:01 pointer:01 functor:01 ...:98 ...:98 imperative:01 imperative:01 patterns:02 patterns:02 data:02 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.3 (2005-04-27) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.1 required=5.0 tests=FORGED_RCVD_HELO autolearn=disabled version=3.0.3 Hello, is there a general overvie (paper or book), where functional and imperative approaches to solve a problem are compared directly? Most often people say, imperative is faster in most of all cases, and only in some cases FP might be faster. If there is a paper/book about problem solving and performance, comparing different approaches I would be happy to have a pointer to it. Also it would be nice to find something about how classical imperative style, OO-style and FP-style are solving problems, and which patterns can be done easier in the one or the other way. I recently had a discussion about some OO-patterns ( so called "GoF"-Book) and tried to solve some of them with OCamls module system. Adapter and bridge was talked about. Adapter was easy in writing a simple wrapper. Bridge could be done with a functor. :) So, if there are direct translations possible, where to find comparisons? Another interesting theme in this respect is: If not only some patterns were adapted to Fp, but the whole problem solving approach is different, which patterns will be unnevcessary then, because the whole structure of the software will be different...?! Ciao, Oliver