From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: (from weis@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id AAA16700 for caml-redistribution; Mon, 4 Oct 1999 00:47:47 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id XAA08927 for <caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr>; Sun, 3 Oct 1999 23:26:16 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from thorium.uunet.be (thorium.uunet.be [194.7.15.88])
	by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA25008
	for <caml-list@inria.fr>; Sun, 3 Oct 1999 23:26:14 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from jannt (uu212-190-12-36.unknown.uunet.be [212.190.12.36])
	by thorium.uunet.be (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id XAA16419
	for <caml-list@inria.fr>; Sun, 3 Oct 1999 23:26:13 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <000f01bf0de7$2f626fd0$240cbed4@jannt>
From: "Jan Brosius" <jan.brosius@village.uunet.be>
To: "OCAML" <caml-list@inria.fr>
Subject: speed versus C
Date: Sun, 3 Oct 1999 23:35:16 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2014.211
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2014.211
Sender: weis

Hi, is there anything known about the efficiency of compiled Ocaml code
compared with C/C++

Thanks

Jan