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 mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.82]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2E10BBAF for ; Wed, 24 Nov 2010 11:24:38 +0100 (CET) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AoIBAAd37EzUNQXamWdsb2JhbACUbY4FFQEBAgEICwoHESKueAGOIgWFR4pk X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.59,247,1288566000"; d="scan'208";a="89246486" Received: from relay03ant.iops.be ([212.53.5.218]) by mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 24 Nov 2010 11:24:38 +0100 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by relay03ant.iops.be (Postfix) with ESMTP id B49C46BF21B3; Wed, 24 Nov 2010 11:24:37 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iops.be; h= content-transfer-encoding:content-type:content-type:mime-version :x-mailer:organization:references:in-reply-to:from:from:subject :subject:message-id:date:date:received:received:received; s= scooby; i=postadmin@iops.be; t=1290594276; bh=0cX6MvRfRbVujszrSI Koge8MAUACXhpotRb6L8n/UWY=; b=NyYt2LPjdTUZY/zPVYxq1MjZV75KF11IWZ TxFHekJh5YinqemKJonyjVXmtMIJDkJpnptVXS/GLHNQQ/v9Rthy0Na7jLo7/jBS dSRWO25lSWObL2LjlVaUv+YBmtDKucijFlzJQYzUQggBeDdnatUG1sgP9tklw8Tl PZCAb62mM= X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at iops.be Received: from relay03ant.iops.be ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (bdell028.dcn.iops.be [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with LMTP id KBLgaCRsGqTL; Wed, 24 Nov 2010 11:24:36 +0100 (CET) Received: from poincare (cust-13-246-109-94.dyn.as47377.net [94.109.246.13]) by relay03ant.iops.be (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44B7E6BF2135; Wed, 24 Nov 2010 11:24:35 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost ([::1]) by poincare with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PLCWg-0007Hj-EN; Wed, 24 Nov 2010 11:24:34 +0100 Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 11:24:33 +0100 (CET) Message-Id: <20101124.112433.2237591808641262985.Christophe.Troestler+ocaml@umons.ac.be> To: igouy2@yahoo.com Cc: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Re: Is OCaml fast? From: Christophe Troestler In-Reply-To: References: X-Face: #2fb%mPx>rRL@4ff~TVgZ"<[:,oL"`TUEGK/[8/qb58~C>jR(x4A+v/n)7BgpEtIph_neoLKJBq0JBY9:}8v|j Organization: University of Mons Return-Receipt-To: Christophe.Troestler@umons.ac.be Disposition-Notification-To: Christophe.Troestler@umons.ac.be X-Mailer: Mew version 6.3.50 on Emacs 23.2 / Mule 6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam: no; 0.00; ocaml:01 christophe:01 troestler:01 christophe:01 troestler:01 ocaml:01 wrote:01 caml-list:01 umh:01 writes:01 implemented:02 external:03 misleading:03 library:03 library:03 On Wed, 24 Nov 2010 06:50:15 +0000, Isaac Gouy wrote: >=20 > Jeff Meister gmail.com> writes: >=20 > > We know what your rules are for binary-trees; repeating them does > > not help. >=20 > When Christophe TROESTLER wrongly states - "OCaml is not authorized > to make use of its very own library!" - he shows that those rules > are not known. Isolating a sentence gives a misleading idea of what I said. Must I really repeat that I was asking WHY is C allowed to use an external library to enhance its memory management=B9 but OCaml cannot use its own library to do that. I am not asking WHAT the rules are but a JUSTIFICATION for them (which you have been incapable of providing so far). C. =B9 Apparently the "Please don't implement your own custom memory pool or free list." does not count if it's implemented by others!