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 31CE6BC57 for ; Fri, 14 May 2010 12:58:47 +0200 (CEST) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AsgEAEvK7EvRVaE0gGdsb2JhbACRSowrCBUBARQkIqwZggCFEy6ITQEBAwWFCwSDOw X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.53,229,1272837600"; d="scan'208";a="62827586" Received: from mail-fx0-f52.google.com ([209.85.161.52]) by mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 14 May 2010 12:58:31 +0200 Received: by fxm1 with SMTP id 1so606838fxm.39 for ; Fri, 14 May 2010 03:58:30 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=1BlqH2w28G9Z+4Lu/uB90zGMfMoUDRM71RDk9J454vE=; b=hVxzIYZ2mvyFf4qh8XrnWAlXXgahSnaK9M54fWCNzsq8hfuLgkbEvVqf+RSJms4tWo wTKcXw2m4xtUQmp1rE2Zypnv3puyrfPgz80DJm9gQPcJoC1QYM0Pcp98nQ47PWH3z/h4 oe17zon8jPWUNUj3sMcnioHVFQHnHRlQLUN+o= 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 :cc:content-type; b=FCC9lIGBfHJ3DAY79Qf/YSo4CNDK+mIEaLDgPc3qLts4Z/WQSzLdR5QD9c/OD+2uIc uYnaPibJ19wpdKeH8sYp38oDCAn/Qt9/dcTHaC3ZOarbkHRQeVeo5bAMPT46QdSqL01Q PZCI6nouFFhMq/wkJtboT+CotoeD0J1zUb4HM= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.204.33.194 with SMTP id i2mr807bkd.140.1273834710250; Fri, 14 May 2010 03:58:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.204.46.20 with HTTP; Fri, 14 May 2010 03:58:30 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <012601caf351$e9a362e0$bcea28a0$@com> References: <951508.20587.qm@web58708.mail.re1.yahoo.com> <201005061233.07551.peng.zang@gmail.com> <07b101caf08b$3e5022c0$baf06840$@com> <088201caf1ce$b5060cb0$1f122610$@com> <20100512151137.26894ywcpv71ixvk@imp.ovh.net> <012601caf351$e9a362e0$bcea28a0$@com> Date: Fri, 14 May 2010 13:58:30 +0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [Caml-list] about OcamIL From: Eray Ozkural To: Jon Harrop Cc: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Spam: no; 0.00; eray:01 ozkural:01 bigloo:01 cheers:01 eray:01 ozkural:01 bilkent:01 wrote:01 wrote:01 caml-list:01 data:02 implemented:02 slower:02 slower:02 groups:02 On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 1:40 PM, Jon Harrop wrote: > Xavier Clerc wrote: >> Limiting myself to the JVM... >> Moreover, at least Scala and Bigloo deliver excellent performances. > > I have benchmarks where the JVM is well over 10x slower than .NET. So I do > not regard any JVM-based language as "high performance". You got a point there. JVM has a ridiculous performance, not fitting for any computationally expensive operation. At best it's some kind of mudware for data plumbing and simple network applications. The memory system, whatever it is doing, is absolutely terrible. I've implemented some semi-sophisticated information retrieval code on it (related to a search engine) and I've seen that it's not only much slower but horribly bloated memory-wise as well. You can only use it for toy problems. And there are even papers using Java/MPI for high performance computing! Using Java still turns any computer to a Commodore 64, so why are people using it? 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