Re: [Caml-list] Why NOT to compile OCaml via C

[oliver <oliver@first.in-berlin.de>]

On Fri, Dec 09, 2011 at 06:57:58AM -0000, oleg@okmij.org wrote:
> 
> Pierre-Alexandre Voye wrote:
> 
> > Note that if Ocaml compiler would have a C backend, all these problems or
> > architecture port would disappear...
> > Ocaml would have more than 30 target[1]
> > In my Opinion, trying to generate assembler is a bad idea because modern CPU
> > require a lot of work to generate good assembler.
> 
> There are many good reasons to avoid C when compiling functional
> languages, especially strict ones.
> 
> One often hears that ``C is a portable assembler''. That has never
> been true. One of the reasons is that every assembler I know has the
> "jmp" instruction, which, without affecting SP, transfers control
> anywhere, out of a procedure or in the middle of a procedure, out of a
> module or into a module. C is built around the stack discipline --
> after all, C is a descendant of Algol 60. (Although C has labels, they
> are limited, even in GCC). Although Algol-60 researchers quickly
> recognized the value of tail recursion, all that knowledge was lost in
> the Dark Ages.
[...]

This somehow is a good example on "OCaml maintenance status..:" thread
and "Some comments on recent discussions" thread...


If this thread comes to a conclusion, the conclusion maybe can be sent to the OCaml core team...
... if it has new insights.

But my guess is, that we end at a point, where OCaml already is,
because I think these kind of dicsussions were already made,
when the design was chosen.

If something new evolves it could be sent to the core team.
But I just doubt, that this will happen here ;)

Ciao,
   Oliver