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 mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.105]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D8A5BBAF for ; Mon, 21 Dec 2009 16:25:08 +0100 (CET) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AuEAAHUiL0vRVdrVkGdsb2JhbACQH4F1ghiGaD8BAQEBCQkMBxMDrByBMoQiiCMBAgMFhCkE X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.47,431,1257116400"; d="scan'208";a="52602659" Received: from mail-bw0-f213.google.com ([209.85.218.213]) by mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 21 Dec 2009 16:25:07 +0100 Received: by bwz5 with SMTP id 5so3518398bwz.3 for ; Mon, 21 Dec 2009 07:25:06 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=vljlarwfOEeip1djdqlfD98tTRTUdYtVDExVjXWIdjM=; b=fKrBVYNiUGw1X+MbNFxozmu17Y/K2cyA27y22A3rOpernabFg7gUNgkSbxK8QdA1UB 50EUvbjE7TFUsjaMnFxzf4vz3M4PA/3EoBrJ+qTbwBD5KeoeQBRgnKGrIXpMvjSYqWNp xCgsjcZ8UwLdrEJFBzJ5blkYw0GFvweeMXz+k= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=RRg8crOw7nHOrmJ/B7po3rQ0zBwJuxkgOZXMdibm7Rll4dz6kUFsQpV2O2DLVZVQAq +gZBwClYGoWoUafL43BOpFootdxu+kRyCgOVrjQTGWI1DZPoEI23vuRcSmjx9ICfNRb1 d9nOggC9RmcR4HLMEJs7mjXq9OklToyiUMY/g= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.204.154.68 with SMTP id n4mr298290bkw.54.1261409106657; Mon, 21 Dec 2009 07:25:06 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <1261406532.18486.26.camel@flake.lan.gerd-stolpmann.de> References: <4B2D2BC1.6020204@msu.edu> <200912200443.57698.jon@ffconsultancy.com> <200912201938.06729.jon@ffconsultancy.com> <20091221152631.35b3a2eb@pbmiha.malagasy.com> <8D2436E9-A41B-48D4-B844-A82E57D47CA2@pulsschlag.net> <1261406532.18486.26.camel@flake.lan.gerd-stolpmann.de> Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2009 17:25:06 +0200 Message-ID: <320e992a0912210725u5137be36qf53745d5bae665d6@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [Caml-list] general question, was Re: OCaml is broken From: Eray Ozkural To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Spam: no; 0.00; ocaml:01 eray:01 ozkural:01 gerd:01 stolpmann:01 gerd:01 ocaml:01 compiler:01 parallelism:01 haskell:01 high-level:01 higher-order:01 haskell:01 cheers:01 eray:01 On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 4:42 PM, Gerd Stolpmann wrote: > > Please don't believe Jon's propaganda. He has just very specific needs > (high performance computing on desktops), and generalizes them in the > way "it's not perfect for me anymore, so it's bad anyway". He has been > doing that for years now, not seeing that he really harms the way ocaml > is seen by newcomers. I've seen some interesting parallel programming projects and language extensions using ocaml. I suppose ocaml could benefit from a parallelizing compiler & standardized explicit parallelism constructs, and be a serious contender for the multicore "market". I personally started out with Haskell with regards to contemporary high-level languages, and then switched to ocaml because of performance and sanity. I think I also love the higher-order modules =) I want to rewrite my stock prediction program in ocaml nowadays. In Haskell, it was a pain to work on large files. Good thing I lost the code in a hard drive crash. The way I see it, ocaml has adequate performance, and is excellent for algorithmic work. I have this half-finished project that features ocaml implementation of some algorithms. You should see them, they are almost identical to pseudo-code. I should move that project to ocamlforge. Cheers, -- Eray Ozkural, PhD candidate. Comp. Sci. Dept., Bilkent University, Ankara http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ai-philosophy http://myspace.com/arizanesil http://myspace.com/malfunct