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 3A205BC0A for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2007 01:46:42 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ptb-relay01.plus.net (ptb-relay01.plus.net [212.159.14.212]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id l54NkfaS015133 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 5 Jun 2007 01:46:42 +0200 Received: from [80.229.56.224] (helo=beast.local) by ptb-relay01.plus.net with esmtp (Exim) id 1HvMFz-00018Y-9E for caml-list@yquem.inria.fr; Tue, 05 Jun 2007 00:46:39 +0100 From: Jon Harrop Organization: Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Subject: Re: Fwd: [Caml-list] Comparison of OCaml and MLton for numerics Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2007 00:40:16 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.7 References: <5195a210705302250u6a9e5adey4ed857480f9e5cd8@mail.gmail.com> <9d3ec8300706041518y115d22bdsa120d4010261d841@mail.gmail.com> <9d3ec8300706041519y57915f66s9506096a0cb9f9d6@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <9d3ec8300706041519y57915f66s9506096a0cb9f9d6@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200706050040.16586.jon@ffconsultancy.com> X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 4664A461.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail . ensmp . fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; ocaml:01 ocaml:01 pointers:01 frog:98 wrote:01 caml-list:01 data:02 structures:02 functional:02 comparison:04 offset:07 disadvantage:08 incidentally:11 might:11 might:11 On Monday 04 June 2007 23:19:20 Till Varoquaux wrote: > For more functional data structures you might be interested by vlists. > There is even an OCaml version. Incidentally, has anyone tried 3-finger trees? Sounds like they might offset the disadvantage of 64-bit pointers... -- Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. OCaml for Scientists http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/ocaml_for_scientists/?e