From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <bluestorm.dylc@gmail.com>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,DNS_FROM_RFC_POST,
	SPF_NEUTRAL autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3
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 9B75FBB84
	for <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>; Fri, 16 Jan 2009 10:05:38 +0100 (CET)
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AhoBAGncb0nRVdsUmGdsb2JhbACTRT4BAQEBAQgJDAcRqzaBA4xnAQMBA4Vv
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.37,276,1231110000"; 
   d="scan'208";a="22568773"
Received: from mail-ew0-f20.google.com ([209.85.219.20])
  by mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 16 Jan 2009 10:05:38 +0100
Received: by ewy13 with SMTP id 13so2126143ewy.9
        for <caml-list@inria.fr>; Fri, 16 Jan 2009 01:05:38 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to
         :subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type
         :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
        bh=x+ILoL6qqPXN4GxyuFdjQdJKwqCg+UtrJHWWPx9u0r0=;
        b=Xxs8lSHmkheA9TYHOz3xryyp2P6TPsHN0lTT0UKWVj2mJwa4act7fMChZGf9yDucEa
         pCoxz/zb7ggqxF2xzE4d5620BzyqwCTEUlZ/8OilNPihSdSssTq3mfYnCUN6uaombouS
         qJVrRkz133PMWtGf96FXQbMoCpoe87pfQyUes=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version
         :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition
         :references;
        b=Sbt0RESKSsHx0AYWQ3HOf7kx0VrAaocKz17XlD6GvA7z6rlugQG0Y2S9hIPm0fNhNl
         HqxHyHw6uINbRlzgkrVUSZs+ylLxqRxvjRWwdGRTaGnoxNkFx/9OfI1rN9OjxOjtlYZx
         zNIMDtXzn2eb4WcPYficQUdwScHJLT8qMul3Y=
Received: by 10.210.117.1 with SMTP id p1mr2844242ebc.180.1232096738107;
        Fri, 16 Jan 2009 01:05:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.210.88.1 with HTTP; Fri, 16 Jan 2009 01:05:38 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <527cf6bc0901160105u67e68ea1qb3633cd51f273aa0@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 10:05:38 +0100
From: "blue storm" <bluestorm.dylc@gmail.com>
To: "Hugo Ferreira" <hmf@inescporto.pt>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Optimizing symbolic processing code
Cc: "caml-list@inria.fr" <caml-list@inria.fr>
In-Reply-To: <4970488C.9080104@inescporto.pt>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <4970488C.9080104@inescporto.pt>
X-Spam: no; 0.00; inference:01 inference:01 compiler:01 low-level:01 ocaml:01 ocaml:01 compiler:01 storm:98 prolog:01 prolog:01 wrote:01 symbolic:01 caml-list:01 implemented:02 groups:02 

On 1/16/09, Hugo Ferreira <hmf@inescporto.pt> wrote:
> I have implemented a simple Prolog like inference engine
> to be used in machine learning algorithms (ILP). My first
> basic test shows that inference is dismally slow (compared
> to a Prolog compiler). Consequently I am looking for
> information on optimizing the code.

Before trying low-level optimizations, i suggest you check carefully
your implementation. It's a bit strange that your performance is so
bad, and i suspect there could be improvement of algorithmic nature.

There have been successful translations of Prolog to OCaml before :
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.prolog/msg/28c4361bb5f865b8?pli=1
, wich is quite different as it uses the ocaml compiler itself to get
good performances.