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 706A9BBAF for ; Wed, 24 Nov 2010 08:16:20 +0100 (CET) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AmAGAPZK7ExQW+UMgWdsb2JhbACBVZMbjgQWARYiIqxRhyuJDIVMBIpf X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.59,246,1288566000"; d="scan'208";a="80087972" Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]) by mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 24 Nov 2010 08:16:20 +0100 Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PL9aT-0003oS-UE for caml-list@inria.fr; Wed, 24 Nov 2010 08:16:17 +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 ; Wed, 24 Nov 2010 08:16:17 +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 ; Wed, 24 Nov 2010 08:16:17 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: caml-list@inria.fr From: Isaac Gouy Subject: Re: Is OCaml fast? Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 07:16:04 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <1290434674.16005.354.camel@thinkpad> <20101122180203.2126497sau3zukgb@webmail.in-berlin.de> <20101123232742.GC28768@siouxsie> <4cecaf13.1328e30a.6035.53e7@mx.google.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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 i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.12) Gecko/20101027 Ubuntu/10.10 (maverick) Firefox/3.6.12) X-Spam: no; 0.00; ocaml:01 writes:01 pointing:06 pointing:06 discussion:06 objection:09 whereas:10 wrong:10 mostly:11 might:12 might:12 turning:16 write:17 write:17 same:17 Andrew gmail.com> writes: > +1. Seriously, Isaac, try to calm down, everything is fine. You might want > to read what others write, I have the feeling that many people were making > valid points, whereas you have mostly been turning down any objection by > pointing people to the same webpage and again. Seriously, Andrew, I have been calm. You might want to read what others write. I have the feeling that a list of those "valid points" would be a better basis for discussion than your feeling. A quick count shows 8 URIs all different - so you are plainly wrong, I have not been "pointing people to the same webpage and again".