From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id DAA26390; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 03:46:33 +0200 (MET DST) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f 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 DAA24621 for ; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 03:46:32 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from smtp1.adl2.internode.on.net (smtp1.adl2.internode.on.net [203.16.214.181]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id i8S1kTVC027057 for ; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 03:46:31 +0200 Received: from [192.168.1.200] (ppp202-133.lns1.syd3.internode.on.net [203.122.202.133]) by smtp1.adl2.internode.on.net (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i8S1k64Y004597; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 11:16:15 +0930 (CST) Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Observations on OCaml vs. Haskell From: skaller Reply-To: skaller@users.sourceforge.net To: John Goerzen Cc: caml-list In-Reply-To: <200409271408.51872.jgoerzen@complete.org> References: <200409271408.51872.jgoerzen@complete.org> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1096335965.28613.793.camel@pelican.wigram> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.2 (1.2.2-4) Date: 28 Sep 2004 11:46:06 +1000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Miltered: at nez-perce with ID 4158C275.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Loop: caml-list@inria.fr X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 observations:01 haskell:01 sourceforge:01 2004:99 haskell:01 duality:01 categorical:01 shootout:01 gcc:01 ocamlopt:01 python:01 3.3:99 statically:01 optimiser:01 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk On Tue, 2004-09-28 at 05:08, John Goerzen wrote: > 1. Haskell lists resemble OCaml Streams Laziness -> control inversion -> duality lists and streams are categorical duals > 2. Haskell strings are lists of characters Performance implications .. > 3. The Num typeclass Non general attempt to provide polyadic programming. > OCaml enlightenment appreciated :-) I would guess Ocaml wins in performance. Shootout at alioth gives: (CRAPS scores) gcc -- 57 ocamlopt -- 40 ghc -- 18 ocamlbyte -- 15 python -- 16 felix -- 3.3 (ouch!) curry (Haskell) -- 0.13 which seems to indicate, at least for statically typed languages, that performance is most closely related to the intensity of effort put into the optimiser. However, Haskell being purely functional may make high performance data structures unavailable, for example arrays (time in secs) gcc -- 0.02 ocaml -- 0.04 ghc -- 1.4 -- John Skaller, mailto:skaller@users.sf.net voice: 061-2-9660-0850, snail: PO BOX 401 Glebe NSW 2037 Australia Checkout the Felix programming language http://felix.sf.net ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners