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=none 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 08BF6BC69 for ; Fri, 9 Mar 2007 15:13:21 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail.roomandboard.com (mail.roomandboard.com [66.84.219.55]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id l29EDJ2R013534 for ; Fri, 9 Mar 2007 15:13:20 +0100 Received: from selma.roomandboard.com ([192.168.101.46]) by mail.roomandboard.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Fri, 9 Mar 2007 08:13:18 -0600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6603.0 content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Caml-list] Interactive technical computing Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2007 08:13:18 -0600 Message-ID: <3D1E4D9CA9BCE04D8F2B55F203AE4CE30666AB87@selma.roomandboard.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [Caml-list] Interactive technical computing Thread-Index: AcdiUnckTbmS3hoiQeSV7l5u/yrmAQAAol/Q From: "Robert Fischer" To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Mar 2007 14:13:18.0804 (UTC) FILETIME=[163AC140:01C76255] X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 45F16B7F.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail . ensmp . fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; ocaml's:01 bytecode:01 bytecode:01 linkable:01 ocaml:01 ocaml:01 sourceforge:01 wrote:01 dynamically:01 slower:01 caml-list:01 caml-list:01 binary:01 bounds:02 native:02 Performance of Ocaml's bytecode is slower than F#? Really? ~~ Robert. -----Original Message----- From: skaller [mailto:skaller@users.sourceforge.net] Sent: Friday, March 09, 2007 7:54 AM To: Robert Fischer Cc: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: RE: [Caml-list] Interactive technical computing On Fri, 2007-03-09 at 07:33 -0600, Robert Fischer wrote: > >> After all, Java and C# aren't intended to be used like that, yet = they > >> certainly have wide-spread adoption. > > > > They don't make binary shared libraries > > because the architecture is a virtual machine driven by > > bytecode .. they DO make dynamically linkable bytecode > > libraries. > > > As long as you play within the bounds of their VM. This is no = different than Ocaml. Performance is different :) That's why I use Ocaml native code exclusively, which doesn't support dynamic loading (yet :) --=20 John Skaller Felix, successor to C++: http://felix.sf.net