On Thursday 24 April 2008 17:41:17 Martin Jambon wrote:
On Thu, 24 Apr 2008, David Teller wrote:
* which syntax extensions do you use so often that you consider they
should be part of the language ?
None because it creates unneeded dependencies between unrelated
libraries.
Agreed. There
On Friday 09 May 2008 14:00:52 you wrote:
Jon Harrop skrev:
. Parallelism is for performance and performance
requires mutable data structures.
I disagree. SMP Erlang has no mutable data structures,
but achieves very good scalability anyway.
Scalability != performance. For CPU
On Friday 09 May 2008 16:38:55 Jeff Polakow wrote:
Hello,
We investigated alternative languages to diversify into last year and
Haskell
was one of them. The single biggest problem with Haskell is that it is
wildly
unpredictable in terms of performance and memory consumption.
This is
On Friday 09 May 2008 19:17:30 Ulf Wiger wrote:
Jon Harrop skrev:
On Friday 09 May 2008 14:00:52 you wrote:
Jon Harrop skrev:
. Parallelism is for performance and performance
requires mutable data structures.
I disagree. SMP Erlang has no mutable data structures,
but achieves
On Saturday 10 May 2008 15:51:20 Ulf Wiger wrote:
Jon Harrop skrev:
On 1 CPU Erlang is currently ~5x slower in this context.
I thought this context for this thread was a blog article
that discussed OCaml's weaknesses in general terms.
Just looking at the default weighting of the shootout
On Friday 09 May 2008 23:25:49 David Teller wrote:
On Fri, 2008-05-09 at 19:10 +0100, Jon Harrop wrote:
Parallelism is easy in F#.
Now, that's a cliffhanger. Could you elaborate?
Sure. Review the concerns cited regarding parallel programming in OCaml:
1. When do we fork? Earlier to amortize
On Monday 12 May 2008 13:54:45 Kuba Ober wrote:
5. Strings: pushing unicode throughout a general purpose language is a
mistake, IMHO. This is why languages like Java and C# are so slow.
Unicode by itself, when wider-than-byte encodings are used, adds zero
runtime overhead; the only overhead
On Monday 12 May 2008 14:31:04 Kuba Ober wrote:
I'm no F# fanboy; I use Ocaml exclusively for most of my numerical work
(some FEM, all numerical methods courses I take), but as a language for
packaged application development (bread-and-butter stuff that sells in
boxes or via downloads) it's
On Tuesday 13 May 2008 03:03:10 Gerd Stolpmann wrote:
Am Dienstag, den 13.05.2008, 02:19 +0100 schrieb Jon Harrop:
On Tuesday 13 May 2008 01:42:42 Gerd Stolpmann wrote:
In this (very unoptimized) multiplier message passing accounts for ~25%
of the runtime. Even for 2 cores
On Monday 21 April 2008 21:47:21 Richard Jones wrote:
On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 03:44:08PM +0100, Jon Harrop wrote:
On Monday 21 April 2008 14:11:51 Richard Jones wrote:
Your threaded code is going to look really stupid when you have NUMA
machines with dozens of cores. Why are we
On Sunday 18 May 2008 09:39:15 Berke Durak wrote: On Sun, May 18, 2008 at
12:03 AM, Jon Harrop [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Avoiding threads does not improve the safety of the language, it simply
degrades the capabilities of the language.
Avoiding threads is like avoiding malloc() in a C
On Monday 19 May 2008 15:09:04 Gerd Stolpmann wrote:
On the contrary: Shared memory parallelization has the fundamental
disadvantage that you cannot reason about it,
I have been reasoning about shared memory parallel programs for many years.
and so the only way of checking the quality of the
On Wednesday 28 May 2008 09:02:52 David Allsopp wrote:
The correct strategy seems to be used for string_of_float infinity:
Well, it's just that string_of_bool can only return two possible values
where string_of_float must perform an allocation each time.
The current implementation of
On Wednesday 28 May 2008 12:18:37 Damien Doligez wrote:
On 2008-05-27, at 11:34, Martin Berger wrote:
Here I disagree. Shared memory concurrency is a specific form
of message passing: Writing to a memory cell is in fact sending
a message to that cell carrying two items, the new value and a
On Thursday 29 May 2008 05:50:33 Peng Zang wrote:
Hello list,
Recently, in building some toy games, I've started using objects. I've
been pleased with them and often find the subtyping convenient.
However, I've run into some issues with the standard physical equality of
objects that the
On Sunday 06 July 2008 16:33:35 Antony Courtney wrote:
I'm an experienced Haskell hacker trying OCaml for the first time.
One thing I am desperately searching for but have been unable to find
is some direct runtime access to the string representation of
arbitrary OCaml values.
OCaml has no
On Thursday 10 July 2008 22:19:05 Gerd Stolpmann wrote:
After having ported godi to mingw I am not sure whether this works at
all. The point is that you usually want to inherit OS resources to the
child process (e.g. sockets). The CreateProcess Win32 call
On Friday 11 July 2008 15:03:48 Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote:
As a case in point, I suggest an experiment (which unfortunately I don't
have the time or motivation to realize). Replace the current Ocaml GC
either in bytecode or in nativecode ocaml by Boehm's collector (which is
multithread
On Monday 14 July 2008 12:32:53 J C wrote:
On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 4:35 AM, Jon Harrop [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
OCaml already has OS native threads (albeit with a global lock), already
supports OpenMP and can already be used to write parallel programs that
exploit multiple cores
From: Raj Bandyopadhyay [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi OCaml folk
I apologize if I've been asking too many questions on this list recently,
but I'm working on a heavy OCaml application and need help sometimes.
I am having a disagreement with a colleague about how the equality
operators in OCaml work
On Wednesday 23 July 2008 09:50:03 adonis28850 wrote:
thanks Hugo, i know there's a Eclipse plug-in, but i would like to get it
on NetBeans,so if someone could help i will thanks!
If I might stick my oar in: why don't the OCaml community write an IDE for
OCaml in OCaml using Camlp4 for parsing
On Saturday 26 July 2008 11:03:12 Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:
The same can be said for the Unix IDE, but the UNIX IDE is 100
times more flexible and more capable than any other IDE in
existance.
Yet we cannot even get basic documentation about potential completions from
any Unix development
On Saturday 26 July 2008 13:07:55 Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:
Jon Harrop wrote:
Yet Make is not expressive enough so we have OMake, OCamlBuild.
I find Make expressive enough. I don't use these others.
The others are particularly useful when you have multiple stages of
compilation
of writing one and the ones with sufficient experience to write
an Ocaml IDE are happy with what they have and are therefore
not interested in writing one (with the possible exception of
Jon Harrop).
Actually, many OCaml programmers gave the F# team positive feedback over their
Visual Studio
On Monday 28 July 2008 18:25:32 Pal-Kristian Engstad wrote:
Richard Jones wrote:
I'm sure you know why, but because (a) it's a huge amount of work and
(b) the sort of people who can do the work already use emacs so they
don't need it.
Actually, as a regular Emacs hacker myself, I checked
On Sunday 10 August 2008 11:04:37 Brighten Godfrey wrote:
Hi,
Here's something that I've wondered about for years; maybe someone
here can enlighten me. One of the few major annoyances in OCaml code
style is that if I define a record in one module, say a Graph module:
type t = {
On Thursday 14 August 2008 03:46:10 David Thomas wrote:
--- On Wed, 8/13/08, Jon Harrop [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I consider them all to be untested because nobody has ever done anything
significant using Haskell AFAIK.
Besides the window manager I'm currently using... :-P
Interestingly
On Thursday 14 August 2008 15:21:40 you wrote:
On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 02:57:47PM +0100, Jon Harrop wrote:
and Haskell is faster than most (scripting) languages used these days
anyway).
Despite being written in Python, Mercurial is orders of magnitude faster
than Darcs.
(wow, very
On Thursday 14 August 2008 21:57:59 you wrote:
Excerpts from Jon Harrop's message of Thu Aug 14 15:57:47 +0200 2008:
On Thursday 14 August 2008 12:50:43 blue storm wrote:
and Haskell is faster than most (scripting) languages used these days
anyway).
Despite being written in Python,
On Thursday 14 August 2008 22:50:19 you wrote:
I'm talking about the informal algorithms, their independent of that kind
of things...
Yes, that may well be true. I think we would need in-depth knowledge of Darcs
to be able to distinguish between the two.
Do any OCaml projects use Darcs, BTW?
On Wednesday 20 August 2008 07:29:21 you wrote:
So I already use Chamo for my daily work (development, edition of text
files). What's missing now is access to more information like location of
definitions, completion and so on. I'm waiting for the result of
ocamlwizard[3] to see how to use
On Saturday 30 August 2008 22:29:51 circ ular wrote:
how do I compile a program?
The compile line for that program is given at the bottom of this page:
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/languages/ray_tracer/comparison.html
Specifically:
ocamlopt -rectypes -inline 1000 ray.ml -o ray
what
affecting ocamlc. So you might also try -inline 0.
Can you post the generated code?
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
___
Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management:
http://yquem.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman
Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
___
Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management:
http://yquem.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/caml-list
Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com
onto a unique
token and writing out the mapping first will shrink such files enormously
whilst still being easily dissected from any language. Moreover, the benefit
is super-linear...
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
!
Throwback should also include the ocamldoc comment for the original definition
and, as Yann Le Du recently suggested for F#, typeset LaTeX. :-)
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
___
Caml-list mailing list
use even on this tiny
code base.
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
___
Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management:
http://yquem.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/caml-list
Archives: http
Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
___
Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management:
http://yquem.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/caml-list
Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com
:
http://code.google.com/p/aihiot/source/browse/trunk/gfx/save_bitmap/ocaml/p
ng.ml
Wicked! Now, who is going to write a minimal self-contained JPEG emitter? ;-)
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
___
Caml
.
Also, note that matrix multiplication is embarassingly parallel. So OCaml's
current problems with parallelism are not limited to slow interthread
communication.
The good news is that the parallel GC is coming along nicely and this will be
a solved problem before long... :-)
--
Dr Jon Harrop
not used measures yet myself but I was just wondering if the OCaml
world had already seen anything like this?
I had been under the impression that this could not be made to work but,
obviously, I was wrong!
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
in MetaOCaml for a language with exceptions imposes
CPS everywhere which is obfuscated and slow without language support.
3. You cannot generate new pattern matches to leverage OCaml's optimizing
pattern match compiler in your run-time generated code (but you can use
static ones).
--
Dr Jon Harrop
independent compilers that could then be free to expose their lexers,
parsers, type checkers and metaprogramming capabilities without licensing
issues.
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
___
Caml-list mailing list
for suitable pieces of code? AFAIK camlp4 modules can't
tell me type of anything. Should I start digging in OCaml compiler sources?
I'd start by reviewing asynchronous workflows.
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
On Saturday 04 October 2008 20:04:16 Richard Jones wrote:
On Sat, Oct 04, 2008 at 08:41:35PM +0100, Jon Harrop wrote:
I submitted the following trivial fix over a year ago:
http://caml.inria.fr/mantis/view.php?id=4338
This makes the mistake of supplying a lump of code instead of a patch
improved in performance?
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
___
Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management:
http://yquem.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/caml-list
Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
On Friday 10 October 2008 04:30:53 Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:
Jon Harrop wrote:
You mean the program that generates OCaml's bytecodes is
written in OCaml.
Commonly known as a compiler.
One of the compilers, yes.
the program that executes OCaml's bytecodes
Commonly known as a virtual
.
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
___
Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management:
http://yquem.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/caml-list
Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Beginner's list: http
anywhere?
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
___
Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management:
http://yquem.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/caml-list
Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Beginner's list: http
: an interactive top-level where output is presented via graphical
elements (e.g. a scene graph) and is no longer limited to just ASCII text.
This would give OCaml the graphical capabilities of Mathematica's
awesome notebook front-end.
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http
?
Without it, I have no way to direct my effort...
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
___
Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management:
http://yquem.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/caml-list
Archives: http
optimizations I can see are to use a faster random number
generator and to inline the vector arithmetic by hand.
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
___
Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management:
http
On Monday 03 November 2008 14:15:38 Kuba Ober wrote:
On Friday 31 October 2008, Jon Harrop wrote:
. Written in OCaml using OCaml's own lexer and parser to save effort and
make it possible for others to help develop it without losing their hair.
That's perhaps possible in the longer run
On Tuesday 04 November 2008 18:35:45 Kuba Ober wrote:
On Monday 03 November 2008, Jon Harrop wrote:
On Monday 03 November 2008 14:15:38 Kuba Ober wrote:
I could port Camelia to OCaml if
someone would first develop Qt bindings for OCaml that would allow me
to do in OCaml what I'm doing
On Tuesday 04 November 2008 23:06:00 Kuba Ober wrote:
On Tuesday 04 November 2008, Jon Harrop wrote:
You'll just be invoking autogenerated Python code using OCaml so OCaml's
class system is only relevant if you want to do some fancy
statically-typed shim. I'd forget about that and just
-platform functionality that
simply doesn't exist anywhere else in one coherent platform.
Maybe if I release Smoke as open source software OCaml will become usable for
advanced GUI programming. If I don't, I think OCaml is dead in the water in
this respect.
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy
, primarily because it is entirely founded upon old-school programming
practice that is long since outdated.
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
___
Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management:
http
.
My guess is the Qt code isn't detecting error conditions at startup when it is
obliged to, whereas glut and SDL are. Moreover, these are old bugs in Qt: I
saw them years ago as well.
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
cases due to
what he's trying to do. Yet that's still way better than dealing with a
toolkit that's fairly new (MPC) or something that gives you 10% of the
functionality you need.
What is MPC?
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
that was written
using Camlp4:
http://caml.inria.fr/pub/ml-archives/caml-list/2007/08/c92bb15c444511674faf0c898d2e9986.en.html
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
___
Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management
On Saturday 08 November 2008 21:03:33 Anastasia Gornostaeva wrote:
On Sat, Nov 08, 2008 at 09:24:05PM +, Jon Harrop wrote:
Richard Jones' OCaml tutorial site has a simple foreach example:
http://www.ocaml-tutorial.org/camlp4_3.10/
Our OCaml Journal published an article about
programming...
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
___
Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management:
http://yquem.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/caml-list
Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Beginner's list
On Saturday 15 November 2008 12:25:17 Richard Jones wrote:
On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 01:02:53PM +, Jon Harrop wrote:
...design that centers around a single unified renderer and unified
(and safe!) representation ...
Huh? Guess you've not used compiz then?
Compiz does not provide
LLVM that runs in
OCaml's VM recently. Using that to implement Javascript on top of OCaml's VM
would be interesting...
Anyway, I think that's a really great piece of work!
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
external length : 'a array - int = %array_length
...
val empty : 'a array
end
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
___
Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management:
http://yquem.inria.fr/cgi
On Tuesday 18 November 2008 18:59:14 Richard Jones wrote:
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 06:17:23PM +, Jon Harrop wrote:
I don't follow. Can you not use include to extend an existing module:
# module Array = struct
include Array
You're missing the point which is scalability - how
this is a step in the wrong direction?
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
___
Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management:
http://yquem.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/caml-list
Archives: http
clash).
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
___
Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management:
http://yquem.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/caml-list
Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Beginner's list: http
On Wednesday 19 November 2008 06:29:52 David Teller wrote:
On Tue, 2008-11-18 at 23:30 +, Jon Harrop wrote:
I only have one major concern: you say with the large number of modules
involved, we would need a hierarchy of modules but the number of modules
involved is tiny (a few dozen
has random
pairs of spaces injected into it. I assume this is a race condition between
printing due to the pasting and printing after the top-level reads a newline.
Any ideas how to circumvent this problem? How is this synchronization supposed
to occur?
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog
OCaml makes it possible to address
many of OCaml's own problems for existing OCaml programmers.
If anyone has any ideas about this I'd love to hear them.
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
___
Caml-list mailing
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
benchmark
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
productive to learn from this development model: an
open source ML with industrial backing would have huge potential.
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
___
Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management:
http
get some kind of GC
working, possibly even a parallel GC. Moreover, I think I can remove all
(performance) overhead associated with automatic memory management from
numerical routines. I think that would be very compelling even if it were bad
for symbolics...
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog
On Wednesday 24 December 2008 13:12:58 Mikkel Fahnøe Jørgensen wrote:
2008/12/23 Jon Harrop j...@ffconsultancy.com:
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
are as comprehensive with regard to optimization
AFAIK.
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
___
Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management:
http://yquem.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/caml-list
Archives: http
only where it makes sense, and if it makes sense then you don't
care about which particular method is called: it's supposed to be safe.
Safety is quite different from easy of use, of course.
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
solution to this problem that
involves visitor patterns and so forth but it is comparatively verbose,
obfuscated and unmaintainable.
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
___
Caml-list mailing list
On Saturday 17 January 2009 23:29:06 David Teller wrote:
On Sat, 2009-01-17 at 22:17 +, Jon Harrop wrote:
We've wrapped part of WPF in a functional shim for our F# for
Visualization product and, even though it was originally intended for
internal use only, our customers are loving using
AFAIK, OCaml's bytecode is typeless. How hard would it be to infer types from
the bytecode in order to create type-specific functions during JIT
compilation?
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
___
Caml
Given the existence of the OCamlJava project, this should be of great interest
to the OCaml community because it might pave the way to even better numerical
performance and easier parallelism with simple interop to rich libraries and
so forth.
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd
On Tuesday 27 January 2009 14:11:23 Jon Harrop wrote:
On a related note, the new code generator in Mono 2.2 has made F# Mono as
fast as OCaml on SciMark2. So a Mono backend might be a viable option.
Turns that tail calls are not yet implemented in Mono so forget that...
--
Dr Jon Harrop
and other
I managed to get Smoke compiled and running on Mac OS, which is LablGL as well
as OCaml itself. I thought Mac OS X sucked but I can hardly blame OCaml for
that. ;-)
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
is that OCaml has introduced an OS kernel lock around
every single byte read! If so, I'm surprised it is running *this* fast...
Rémi: assuming I am correct, I'd recommend using memory mapping (and rewriting
that code ;-).
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com
should be obvious.
You probably just want to replace read_char with a function that increments a
counter and reads from the array, with the whole parser inside the
try_finally.
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
still acting upon OCaml's data structures.
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
___
Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management:
http://yquem.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/caml-list
Archives: http
Is the invoke function that forks a Unix process to compute a future in
parallel implemented in any of OCaml's third party libraries?
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
___
Caml-list mailing list
:
http://www.primatechpaper.com
Any takers?
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
___
Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management:
http://yquem.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/caml-list
Archives: http
to those from your book).
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
___
Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management:
http://yquem.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/caml-list
Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
with
the floating point state somehow...
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
___
Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management:
http://yquem.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/caml-list
Archives: http
On Friday 27 February 2009 21:34:35 Jon Harrop wrote:
Oh dear. Then I am very sorry to tell you that Tim Rentsch's book is
virtually identical to your own, having been tweaked just enough to evade
copyright.
Actually the later chapters (about a third of the main text) are entirely
different
into JIT compiled code from OCaml bytecode or
native code.
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
___
Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management:
http://yquem.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/caml-list
On Monday 02 March 2009 14:28:23 Florent Ouchet wrote:
Jon Harrop a écrit :
There are really two major advantages over the current ocamlopt design
and both stem from the use of JIT compilation:
. Run-time types allow per-type functions like generic pretty printers
and comparison
in the near future.
I agree that this text would also fill a valuable place in the spectrum of
OCaml books. The contents are clearly ideal for students but would also give
computer science graduates an extensive theoretical understanding of OCaml.
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http
. Furthermore, the memory consumption of his library is awful. OCaml's
GC is far more efficient with memory whilst permitting easy sharing.
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
___
Caml-list mailing list
there is only one code location to update. Functors give
you the same capability in OCaml but they are rarely used precisely because
the functionality is not very useful.
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
On Wednesday 04 March 2009 00:58:59 Yoann Padioleau wrote:
Jon Harrop j...@ffconsultancy.com writes:
On Tuesday 03 March 2009 22:31:55 Yoann Padioleau wrote:
I don't know what are the Stepanov requirements, but C++
can do unboxed collections like listint, which OCaml can
not provide I
On Wednesday 04 March 2009 00:11:32 you wrote:
On Tue, 3 Mar 2009, Jon Harrop wrote:
Functors give you the same capability in OCaml but they are rarely used
precisely because the functionality is not very useful.
Also largely because there is not enough good tutorial information available
to OCaml
bytecode and the result is a 60Mb file so I doubt it will satisfy small.
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
___
Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management:
http://yquem.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman
1 - 100 of 294 matches
Mail list logo
