From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gclci-caml-list@m.gmane.org>
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 E3BD3BBAF
	for <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>; Tue, 23 Nov 2010 21:18:03 +0100 (CET)
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AqoEAIew60xQW+UMgWdsb2JhbACBVYF5kRWOAxUBARYiIq4RPIctiQyBIoM2cwSKXg
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.59,243,1288566000"; 
   d="scan'208";a="80808994"
Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12])
  by mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 23 Nov 2010 21:18:03 +0100
Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <gclci-caml-list@m.gmane.org>)
	id 1PKzJR-00019i-QL
	for caml-list@inria.fr; Tue, 23 Nov 2010 21:18:01 +0100
Received: from c-24-4-7-10.hsd1.ca.comcast.net ([24.4.7.10])
        by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian))
        id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00
        for <caml-list@inria.fr>; Tue, 23 Nov 2010 21:18:01 +0100
Received: from igouy2 by c-24-4-7-10.hsd1.ca.comcast.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian))
        id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00
        for <caml-list@inria.fr>; Tue, 23 Nov 2010 21:18:01 +0100
X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/
To: caml-list@inria.fr
From: Isaac Gouy <igouy2@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Is OCaml fast?
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2010 20:17:46 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <loom.20101123T210854-665@post.gmane.org>
References: <1290434674.16005.354.camel@thinkpad> <AANLkTi=nsgA3qEmpj0=89AodNN4M1tru+WJSsyYJ0ZqV@mail.gmail.com> <loom.20101123T030214-243@post.gmane.org> <20101123.113733.2059974256209184038.Christophe.Troestler+ocaml@umons.ac.be> <066401cb8b28$a46a1740$ed3e45c0$@com> <loom.20101123T190142-212@post.gmane.org> <20101123211431.4a518a83@deb0>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org
X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: sea.gmane.org
User-Agent: Loom/3.14 (http://gmane.org/)
X-Loom-IP: 24.4.7.10 (Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.12) Gecko/20101027 Ubuntu/10.10 (maverick) Firefox/3.6.12)
X-Spam: no; 0.00; ocaml:01 ocaml:01 edwin:98 writes:01 performs:06 benchmarks:07 benchmarks:07 doesn't:12 game:13 sounds:16 worse:16 then:17 there:18 tasks:20 could:21 

Török Edwin <edwintorok <at> gmail.com> writes:

-snip- 
> Sounds good. Then Ocaml could still win if it performs well on the
> other benchmarks.


The main benchmarks game summary is median and quartiles so one measurement
doesn't have much influence.

There are several tasks which have worse performing OCaml programs than
binary-trees.