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=0.5 required=5.0 tests=DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE 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 22179BC69 for ; Fri, 1 Jun 2007 04:49:26 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail9.dslextreme.com (mail9.dslextreme.com [66.51.199.94]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with SMTP id l512nOxI015543 for ; Fri, 1 Jun 2007 04:49:25 +0200 Received: (qmail 9785 invoked from network); 1 Jun 2007 02:49:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO goalie.local) (erickt@138.72.243.44) by mail9.dslextreme.com with (RC4-MD5 encrypted) SMTP; Thu, 31 May 2007 19:49:23 -0700 Message-ID: <465F894E.9050809@dslextreme.com> Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 19:49:50 -0700 From: Erick Tryzelaar User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (Macintosh/20070326) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: skaller Cc: Erik de Castro Lopo , caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Comparison of OCaml and MLton for numerics References: <5195a210705302250u6a9e5adey4ed857480f9e5cd8@mail.gmail.com> <200705311008.16662.jon@ffconsultancy.com> <5195a210705310222p6aa8482fr70e7bf2b2b631b72@mail.gmail.com> <200705311127.28639.jon@ffconsultancy.com> <465F3E8C.10404@inria.fr> <1180660974.15528.126.camel@rosella.wigram> <20070601113615.fd7857e5.mle+ocaml@mega-nerd.com> <1180664498.15528.153.camel@rosella.wigram> In-Reply-To: <1180664498.15528.153.camel@rosella.wigram> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 465F8934.002 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail . ensmp . fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; ocaml:01 citeseer:01 psu:98 wrote:01 wrote:01 slides:01 caml-list:01 thesis:01 programming:03 optimization:03 optimization:03 clause:03 erik:04 comparison:04 fri:05 skaller wrote: > On Fri, 2007-06-01 at 11:36 +1000, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote: > >> skaller wrote: >> >> >>> Someone (as usual no URL sorry) wrote a paper roughly titled >>> 'guaranteed optimisations' which is actually an interesting >>> perspective on this whole scenario. >>> >> I found a bunch of slides titled "The Guaranteed Optimization >> Clause of the Macro-Writer's Bill of Rights": >> >> http://www.cs.indiana.edu/~chaynes/danfest/dyb.pdf >> > > The paper i think of was a master or PhD thesis.. > > How about this one? Guaranteed Optimization for Domain-Specific Programming http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/veldhuizen03guaranteed.html