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 DADF6BBAF for ; Wed, 4 Nov 2009 16:37:22 +0100 (CET) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AhwGAKgu8UpN6B+kYWdsb2JhbACBT5oEICPCN4JBgXwEglc X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.44,680,1249250400"; d="scan'208";a="36164477" Received: from fe01x03-cgp.akado.ru (HELO akado.ru) ([77.232.31.164]) by mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 04 Nov 2009 16:37:22 +0100 Received: from [10.0.66.9] ([10.0.66.9] verified) by fe01-cgp.akado.ru (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2.13) with ESMTP id 123682331; Wed, 04 Nov 2009 18:37:17 +0300 Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2009 18:37:21 +0300 (MSK) From: malc X-X-Sender: malc@linmac.oyster.ru To: Jan Kybic Cc: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] AST versus Ocaml In-Reply-To: <878wem75iq.fsf@fel.cvut.cz> Message-ID: References: <878wem75iq.fsf@fel.cvut.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Spam: no; 0.00; malc:01 ocaml:01 ocaml:01 high-level:01 genericity:01 inference:01 explicitely:01 garbage:01 wrote:01 caml-list:01 theorem:02 ast:02 ast:02 functional:02 shootout:02 On Wed, 4 Nov 2009, Jan Kybic wrote: > Dear all, > > I am an Ocaml user but execution speed is very important for me, so I am > constantly looking for ways to make my programs faster, if possible > without sacrificing the high-level language benefits (genericity, > garbage collection, safety). I have just come across a language > called AST (http://www.ats-lang.org/) which claims to be functional, > based on ML (or Ocaml), and at the same time very efficient, perhaps > as efficient as C. (AST has some other features (theorem proving) > which I cannot fully appreciate at the moment.) > > Some of the benchmarks definitely seem to support the speed claim, > others are more suspicious as they are actually partly coded in C. http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/72hmw/language_shootout_ats_is_the_new_top_gunslinger/c05iq0a > > Before devoting more time to investigating AST, I wanted to ask if you > perhaps already have some experience with this language and can make a > comparison to Ocaml. I have already observed that the type inference > seems to be weaker in AST so the function types have to be explicitely > given. > > Thank you for your comments. > > Jan > > -- mailto:av1474@comtv.ru