On Monday 21 December 2009 05:32:38 Markus Mottl wrote:
On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 23:30, Jon Harrop j...@ffconsultancy.com wrote:
Traffic here:
2007: 5814
2008: 4051
2009: 3071
That's because I don't have much time to post here nowaydays. I'm
sure if Jon followed my example, we would
On 2009-12-20, at 13:21, Erik Rigtorp wrote:
The first step for OCaml would be to be able to run multiple
communicating instances of the runtime bound to one core each in one
process and have them communicate via lock free queues.
Does anyone know how to do lock-free queues in a
Jon Harrop j...@ffconsultancy.com writes:
We've discussed the problems with that before. Writing a parallel generic
quicksort seems to be a good test of a decent multicore capable language
implementation. Currently, F# is a *long* way ahead of everything open
source.
How do you implement
Damien Guichard alphabl...@orange.fr writes:
I once faced this situation and the solution is to use modules.
That is one good practical solution.
The simpler solution that immediatly came to my mind is eta-expansion.
type foo = {bar : 'a. 'a - 'a}
let a : int - int = fun x - x
let
On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 2:44 PM, Goswin von Brederlow goswin-...@web.de wrote:
However it issues a warning so i acknowledge it's less elegant.
Which I don't quite understand.
The warning is based on the results of the type inference algorithm.
You're not supposed to find values of type 'a. 'a
Jon Harrop j...@ffconsultancy.com :
Two cores is standard by
now, I'm used to 8, next year 32 and so on. OCaml will only become
more and more irrelevant. I hate to see that happening.
Me too. The OCaml language will continue to kick ass for some time to
come but INRIA's
Hi,
i have a large project written in C++, for which i am planing to write add-ons
and tools in ocaml, e.g. different tools to analyse my code (dependency stuff),
an interpreter for a script-language i plan to include, etc, etc. form my time
at the uni i remembered that ocaml allows to compile
Am Montag, den 21.12.2009, 15:19 +0100 schrieb Keyan:
Hi,
i have a large project written in C++, for which i am planing to write
add-ons and tools in ocaml, e.g. different tools to analyse my code
(dependency stuff), an interpreter for a script-language i plan to include,
etc, etc. form
following this discussion, i am not so sure anymore, if ocaml is a good
decision. may be i got this discussion wrong, but if ocaml is dying out, i
might have to look for another functional programming language to use with my
project.
Every programming language suffers its trolls and
On Mon, 2009-12-21 at 15:19 +0100, Keyan wrote:
Hi,
i have a large project written in C++, for which i am planing to write
add-ons and tools in ocaml, e.g. different tools to analyse my code
(dependency stuff), an interpreter for a script-language i plan to include,
etc, etc. form my
Hi,
first of all thanks for the replies, and for not misunderstanding my email.
What language you chose should depend always on your (your team) skills,
tools and tasks.
i dont want to go into a which-programming-language-is-best-for-what discussion
(as this will never end), but at this
On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 04:01:31PM +0100, Keyan wrote:
but at this point i wanted to know if ocaml is still alive, i.e. if
you can still easily download and install it on a variety of OS, and
Quite alive.
http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/o/ocaml/current/changelog
(Look for new
On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 4:42 PM, Gerd Stolpmann g...@gerd-stolpmann.de wrote:
Please don't believe Jon's propaganda. He has just very specific needs
(high performance computing on desktops), and generalizes them in the
way it's not perfect for me anymore, so it's bad anyway. He has been
doing
Hi,
i dont want to go into a which-programming-language-is-best-for-what
discussion (as this will never end), but at this point i wanted to know
if ocaml is still alive, i.e. if you can still easily download and
install it on a variety of OS, and if it will be supported in the future.
The
I agree with most of what Dario Teixeira wrote, except for one small
quibble:
Dario Teixeira wrote:
Last but not least, Ocaml plays a central role in multiple INRIA
projects, which means its creators have all the reason to continue
maintaining it and improving it for the foreseeable future
right, the use case is totally wrong
I'm automatically generating code from type declarations using camlp4 and it
would break down in presence of polymorphic record fields.
Here's the fix I chose (Thanks to Mr. Pouillard):
module type MagicSignature =
sig
val x : 'a
end
and I would replace
Ok, so for the beginner I am (must I ask on the beginners ML?): is
multicore support just useless or not?
I am beginning using Ocsigen, for a growing web project:
Is multicore support useless for scaling on Ocsigen?
X-post to Ocsigen ML.
--
Architecte Informatique chez Blueline/Gulfsat:
Mihamina,
Ok, so for the beginner I am (must I ask on the beginners ML?): is
multicore support just useless or not?
That *entirely* depends on what you want to do. If, for example, you
have to do a large calculation that is limited by memory and not by CPU,
or, if you have an application
On Monday 21 December 2009 14:19:36 Mihamina Rakotomandimby wrote:
Ok, so for the beginner I am (must I ask on the beginners ML?): is
multicore support just useless or not?
I have found a great many uses for multicores but you need a decent foundation
to make effective use of it.
--
Dr Jon
On Monday 21 December 2009 14:19:05 Keyan wrote:
Hi,
i have a large project written in C++, for which i am planing to write
add-ons and tools in ocaml, e.g. different tools to analyse my code
(dependency stuff), an interpreter for a script-language i plan to include,
etc, etc. form my time
Hi,
I am beginning using Ocsigen, for a growing web project:
Is multicore support useless for scaling on Ocsigen?
Categorically, yes. In fact, I would say that the model used by Ocsigen
is close to being optimal performance-wise as far as web applications are
concerned. The Ocsigen server
Dear colleagues,
[ Apologies for the crossposting or if you get multiple copies of this email ]
We would like to invite you to submit a paper and / or a special session /
workshop proposal to the 8th IEEE/ACIS International Conference on Software
Engineering Research, Management and Applications
On Monday 21 December 2009 13:31:10 Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Jon Harrop j...@ffconsultancy.com writes:
We've discussed the problems with that before. Writing a parallel generic
quicksort seems to be a good test of a decent multicore capable language
implementation. Currently, F# is a
On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 17:18, Gerd Stolpmann g...@gerd-stolpmann.de wrote:
As you mention order books and soft-realtime, I guess your main concern
are minimized latencies. Well, you need then a style of parallelism that
focuses on a certain processing path for a single data item, and where
On 21-12-2009, Erik Rigtorp e...@rigtorp.com wrote:
On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 17:18, Gerd Stolpmann g...@gerd-stolpmann.de wrote:
Even if I want to process a dataset and partition it and sends the
work to multiple processes there is no framework in OCaml for me to
use.
There are many
On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 14:47, Yaron Minsky ymin...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 7:21 AM, Erik Rigtorp e...@rigtorp.com wrote:
The first step for OCaml would be to be able to run multiple
communicating instances of the runtime bound to one core each in one
process and have them
Hi Lukasz,
Yikes! Care to start an argument on my behalf?
2009/12/20 Lukasz Stafiniak lukst...@gmail.com:
-- Forwarded message --
From: Dario Teixeira darioteixe...@yahoo.com
Date: Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 3:27 PM
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Re: OCaml is broken
To: Erik Rigtorp
27 matches
Mail list logo
