From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 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 388E1BC69 for ; Fri, 9 Mar 2007 18:32:14 +0100 (CET) Received: from ptb-relay03.plus.net (ptb-relay03.plus.net [212.159.14.214]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id l29HWCoX031777 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Fri, 9 Mar 2007 18:32:13 +0100 Received: from [80.229.56.224] (helo=beast.local) by ptb-relay03.plus.net with esmtp (Exim) id 1HPiwt-0005ZN-Ve for caml-list@yquem.inria.fr; Fri, 09 Mar 2007 17:32:12 +0000 From: Jon Harrop Organization: Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Interactive technical computing Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2007 17:26:02 +0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.5 References: <3D1E4D9CA9BCE04D8F2B55F203AE4CE30666AB87@selma.roomandboard.com> In-Reply-To: <3D1E4D9CA9BCE04D8F2B55F203AE4CE30666AB87@selma.roomandboard.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200703091726.02511.jon@ffconsultancy.com> X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 45F19A1C.005 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail . ensmp . fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; ocaml's:01 bytecode:01 ocaml:01 ocamlopt:01 ocaml:01 frog:98 wrote:01 slower:01 slower:01 caml-list:01 native:02 compiled:04 computing:05 fischer:11 robert:12 On Friday 09 March 2007 14:13, Robert Fischer wrote: > Performance of Ocaml's bytecode is slower than F#? Really? Performance of OCaml compiled to native code with ocamlopt is sometimes slower than F#, so yes. -- Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. OCaml for Scientists http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/ocaml_for_scientists