On Wednesday 24 December 2008 13:12:58 Mikkel Fahnøe Jørgensen wrote:
> 2008/12/23 Jon Harrop :
> > symbolics. I am guessing the performance of allocation will be degraded
> > 10-100x but many allocations can be removed. This leaves me wondering how
> > much slowdown is acceptable without deterring
2008/12/23 Jon Harrop :
> symbolics. I am guessing the performance of allocation will be degraded
> 10-100x but many allocations can be removed. This leaves me wondering how
> much slowdown is acceptable without deterring a lot of users?
I think this would be major problem. A great advantage of O
On Tuesday 23 December 2008 15:32:52 Ashish Agarwal wrote:
> > a lot more effort into numerics and string processing and a lot less
> > effort into symbolics.
>
> Is there any fundamental reason these two goals must be at odds?
No theoretical reason, AFAIK.
> Why can't a compiler be good at numer
> a lot more effort into numerics and string processing and a lot less
effort into
symbolics
Is there any fundamental reason these two goals must be at odds? Why can't a
compiler be good at numeric and symbolic computation?
On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 4:59 AM, Jon Harrop wrote:
> On Tuesday 23 Dece
On Tuesday 23 December 2008 09:43:59 Oliver Bandel wrote:
> Hello Jon,
>
> where have you been for such a long time?
My time has been split between building products around F# (in preparation for
its world domination in 2010 ;-) and my bouncing baby boy.
> It seems, your destructive ages of blam
On Tuesday 23 December 2008 10:04:55 Richard Jones wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 06:07:37AM +, Jon Harrop wrote:
> > another interesting project and a JIT compiler for OCaml's existing
> > bytecode would also be nice.
>
> Probably easier to start with the abstract syntax tree that camlp4
> w
On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 06:07:37AM +, Jon Harrop wrote:
> another interesting project and a JIT compiler for OCaml's existing bytecode
> would also be nice.
Probably easier to start with the abstract syntax tree that camlp4
writes out. http://brion.inria.fr/gallium/index.php/AST
Rich.
--
On Tuesday 23 December 2008 06:07:37 Jon Harrop wrote:
> Yes. I'll do a bit more work on it and then tidy it up and document it
> before uploading it, unless there is any great interest from people now.
Incidentally, I would like to know what performance issues (good and bad)
people have with the
Hello Jon,
where have you been for such a long time?
It seems, your destructive ages of blaming OCaml-team
instead of implementing things by your own, are now gone
(or at least on decay).
Seems you are back on the constructive side.
Nice to meet you at this place. :)
Zitat von Jon Harrop :
On Monday 22 December 2008 21:44:57 Richard Jones wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 05:00:08PM +, Jon Harrop wrote:
> > . Declare and then call C functions directly.
>
> This is a particularly nice feature of C#.
Yes. Maybe I can get a more compelling demo working.
> So you're going to put t
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 05:00:08PM +, Jon Harrop wrote:
> . Declare and then call C functions directly.
This is a particularly nice feature of C#.
[...]
So you're going to put this on ocamlforge soon?
Rich.
--
Richard Jones
Red Hat
___
Caml-l
On Friday 19 December 2008 22:53:15 Jon Harrop wrote:
> On Friday 19 December 2008 22:36:40 Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:
> > Jon Harrop wrote:
> > > I have actually already started this using the excellent LLVM project
> > > and I just obtained the first promising results yesterday: a simple
> > > be
12 matches
Mail list logo
