From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Original-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104]) by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BCF107EE25 for ; Thu, 14 Nov 2013 17:06:26 +0100 (CET) Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of bobzhang1988@gmail.com) identity=pra; client-ip=209.85.161.174; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="bobzhang1988@gmail.com"; x-sender="bobzhang1988@gmail.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: Pass (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: domain of bobzhang1988@gmail.com designates 209.85.161.174 as permitted sender) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=209.85.161.174; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="bobzhang1988@gmail.com"; x-sender="bobzhang1988@gmail.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible; x-record-type="v=spf1" Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of postmaster@mail-gg0-f174.google.com) identity=helo; client-ip=209.85.161.174; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="bobzhang1988@gmail.com"; x-sender="postmaster@mail-gg0-f174.google.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AoYBAEH0hFLRVaGunGdsb2JhbABahwe8LIEfFg4BAQEBAQYNCQkUKIIlAQEBAwEBAQEgFQgBGxwCAwELBgULDQICBRYLAgIJAwIBAgEREQEFARwHDAgBAYdqAQMJBgWhV4wEU4MJhFsKGScNZIhVAQUMgR2OPYJrgUYDiUKOTpAgQYRx X-IPAS-Result: AoYBAEH0hFLRVaGunGdsb2JhbABahwe8LIEfFg4BAQEBAQYNCQkUKIIlAQEBAwEBAQEgFQgBGxwCAwELBgULDQICBRYLAgIJAwIBAgEREQEFARwHDAgBAYdqAQMJBgWhV4wEU4MJhFsKGScNZIhVAQUMgR2OPYJrgUYDiUKOTpAgQYRx X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.93,700,1378850400"; d="scan'208";a="35552375" Received: from mail-gg0-f174.google.com ([209.85.161.174]) by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-SHA; 14 Nov 2013 17:06:26 +0100 Received: by mail-gg0-f174.google.com with SMTP id q3so882845gge.19 for ; Thu, 14 Nov 2013 08:06:24 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:newsgroups:to:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=o9k/POqJRl/3ldEwSCBiOMiaTS2ELVP00k6G+ZnJOpc=; b=0p8ZPb6nNVa1kvFKyXAdjCDuAfPiYVeDVQ0Nx0yf06C/NvJhoIPTPCKtN3i4qZ2kOO Sg4W34g9FeiKmOFYaR8PlCUdF6+lTgbkYRtZ25sC+OAMHjKwX3XjcTil94bG8gK7Bug5 +r5wWS2PdeeqHqAbk6VdhkAkDqIUU9BWAYIUteriOunPxg3V8B2dSmHVg6XLT6/6QrkX zEXvSbPN/TB4e8+tkpInI1nmyiNgJJrSDkDdwepzHC2/Q7rkhiNCb62ubdD7w1+pRC0O E3RNxyNDRF/IxHT6bAUpA1jF1Fh0VrSYddvX6Whg2/3uzemAKf8fVhy2KNShNsUb1iz4 1TxA== X-Received: by 10.236.180.38 with SMTP id i26mr1600763yhm.53.1384445184828; Thu, 14 Nov 2013 08:06:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from Hongbos-MacBook-Pro.local ([158.130.111.178]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id h66sm55732yhb.7.2013.11.14.08.06.23 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 14 Nov 2013 08:06:23 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <5284F4FF.2000900@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2013 11:06:23 -0500 From: Hongbo Zhang User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lang.caml.inria To: jon@ffconsultancy.com, caml-list@inria.fr References: <010801cedc66$0425bcc0$0c713640$@ffconsultancy.com> <14f25a35d63f2b6ce6185d86dc66d2bd@whitequark.org> <012101cedc76$1665b920$43312b60$@ffconsultancy.com> <01f601cee0a2$aae0b520$00a21f60$@ffconsultancy.com> In-Reply-To: <01f601cee0a2$aae0b520$00a21f60$@ffconsultancy.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Caml-list] LLVM OCaml bindings On 11/13/13, 2:00 PM, Jon Harrop wrote: > Jeff Meister wrote: >> If I have >> to give up static type safety to work with LLVM in OCaml, then I might >> as well not use OCaml on that project. > > Peter Zotov wrote: >> Speed? :) > > I use OCaml+LLVM for the algebraic data types, pattern matching, functional programming and so on. Type safety of the bindings is way down on the list for me. agreed, the major benefit for me compared with c++, is compile time performance, pattern matching and toplevel -- the type safety of the bindings is nice but not necessary if it brings too much complexity to the API > Cheers, > Jon. > > >