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 mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.83]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id B26ABBC57 for ; Fri, 19 Nov 2010 19:42:59 +0100 (CET) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Al8CAElU5kzRVaE0kGdsb2JhbACUX416CBUBAQEBCQkMBxEDH6NAi3oBBY4qAQSFSw X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.59,224,1288566000"; d="scan'208";a="80355071" Received: from mail-fx0-f52.google.com ([209.85.161.52]) by mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 19 Nov 2010 19:42:59 +0100 Received: by fxm15 with SMTP id 15so2957231fxm.39 for ; Fri, 19 Nov 2010 10:42:59 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:content-type:mime-version :subject:from:in-reply-to:date:content-transfer-encoding:message-id :references:to:x-mailer; bh=58AEzHOHlS6ZfUGLyMEtEqU6dWIeFBz84MuJMOn19MU=; b=bng190WiUtS03zIFxr1TcWfqQ16pkl7m2VPx/CDBP7cDH7WWhaHgcRP43Y/V7xMDx0 JQTJWf+uYLbbQ+DNo/dD2+pdgoGiDbasIKhJ0TzCEa1nsMKwJqW94iwi9P0sx7dGDLgk V3UtWg+mEsx964lKcPr6eoH6jnUY4PXq/9csk= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer; b=B05/xpUFQXA/GgEZZzIICUynad6ulBHylsD0WRC8L7guoQH3NeFWI9/7Hh32eVd5D7 qGhF9xese1kgyt4nDrgOwuTgxcJH84I5HwOkgTRu75Coj9N/1l7SCBe99HLPRf8MaBeu /HKMYiONMdep8uX4QUTPcLhnWRIAy/gJyeXxo= Received: by 10.223.113.78 with SMTP id z14mr2199472fap.50.1290192179207; Fri, 19 Nov 2010 10:42:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from bespin.kosmos.all (ip-95-223-170-32.unitymediagroup.de [95.223.170.32]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id a25sm626936fak.44.2010.11.19.10.42.57 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Fri, 19 Nov 2010 10:42:58 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1081) Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Native toplevel? (was: OCamlJit 2.0) From: Benedikt Meurer In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2010 19:42:56 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <4CE395D4.4000105@frisch.fr> To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1081) X-Spam: no; 0.00; toplevel:01 prototyping:01 toplevel:01 ocaml:01 ocaml's:01 tuareg:01 rewriting:01 byte-code:01 2.0:98 competitor:98 competitor:98 wrote:01 wrote:01 typing:01 matlab:01 On Nov 19, 2010, at 19:30 , Ashish Agarwal wrote: > On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 1:24 PM, Hezekiah M. Carty = wrote: >=20 > ocamlscript is certainly a wonderful tool, for prototyping and > otherwise. It unfortunately doesn't help specifically with the "load > a large file and do something with it" case. >=20 > Right. >=20 > Also, I should mention that a high-performance toplevel, combined with = new libraries like OCaml-R, would essentially make OCaml a competitor to = Matlab and R. This would really expand OCaml's scope to an important = area. This was actually the main motivation for OCamlJit, tho we did not = specifically need a competitor to Matlab (we use tuareg mode most of the = time, to prototype term rewriting/typing stuff, but also for some = complex LaTeX generation tasks). After thinking about it for a few days = now, I think a native toplevel would indeed solve the problem, in a = better way than a byte-code JITter. I'll try to look into the remaining = issues with the native toplevel, but I have some other stuff to finish = first. Benedikt=