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 B9E78BC69 for ; Fri, 1 Jun 2007 18:57:31 +0200 (CEST) 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 l51GvVps017754 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Fri, 1 Jun 2007 18:57:31 +0200 Received: from [80.229.56.224] (helo=beast.local) by ptb-relay03.plus.net with esmtp (Exim) id 1HuARO-0001wb-Cy for caml-list@yquem.inria.fr; Fri, 01 Jun 2007 17:57:30 +0100 From: Jon Harrop Organization: Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Comparison of OCaml and MLton for numerics Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2007 17:52:04 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.7 References: <5195a210705302250u6a9e5adey4ed857480f9e5cd8@mail.gmail.com> <3d13dcfc0706010449k53f1c364gfd4db47c7c258725@mail.gmail.com> <1180708903.4140.23.camel@rosella.wigram> In-Reply-To: <1180708903.4140.23.camel@rosella.wigram> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200706011752.04504.jon@ffconsultancy.com> X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 46604FFB.004 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail . ensmp . fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; ocaml:01 optimising:01 compiler:01 compiler:01 yaron:01 minsky:01 ocaml:01 frog:98 wrote:01 wrote:01 caml-list:01 optimizing:02 comparison:04 implement:06 dollars:89 On Friday 01 June 2007 15:41:43 skaller wrote: > Paying 4 times more dollars for a CPU that is twice as fast is a > very expensive solution compared to an optimising compiler .. Much more cost effective to implement more effective compiler features in house. All you need is the author of an excellent whole-program optimizing compiler for some related language. On Friday 01 June 2007 12:29:00 Yaron Minsky wrote: > I could not agree with this sentiment more. Stephen actually now works at > Jane Street, and since his arrival he's taught us a number of techniques... See. ;-) -- Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. OCaml for Scientists http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/ocaml_for_scientists/?e