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 KAA09636 for caml-redistribution; Tue, 18 Mar 1997 10:47:01 +0100 (MET) 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 GAA05879 for ; Tue, 18 Mar 1997 06:14:03 +0100 (MET) Received: from www.nextsolution.co.jp (www.nextsolution.co.jp [202.33.245.114]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with SMTP id GAA04232 for ; Tue, 18 Mar 1997 06:14:00 +0100 (MET) Received: from sparc3.co.jp (sparc3 [202.235.80.3]) by www.nextsolution.co.jp (SMI-8.6/) with ESMTP id OAA26924 for ; Tue, 18 Mar 1997 14:12:48 +0900 Received: by sparc3.co.jp (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id OAA01112; Tue, 18 Mar 1997 14:15:07 +0900 Date: Tue, 18 Mar 1997 14:15:07 +0900 Message-Id: <199703180515.OAA01112@sparc3.co.jp> From: Frank Christoph To: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: speed of byte-compiled ocaml considered high In-Reply-To: <199703152058.OAA24580@kimbark.uchicago.edu> References: <199703152058.OAA24580@kimbark.uchicago.edu> Sender: weis >>>>> "Lyn" == Lyn A Headley writes: > dear camlfiends, I have recently used ocaml to write a couple of > text-munging scripts. One of them, which makes a few scans over a fairly > large file, seems to run really fast! I was wondering if anyone has done > any benchmarks comparing ocaml and other text-processing languages like > perl. I don't know if you were using the lexing or parsing facilities, but you should be aware that, although the data tables and peripheral utilities or in O'Caml, the engines are actually written in C and are part of the run-time system, so they are very fast, even as bytecode. Also, I am pretty sure that the Regexp library is based on GNU regexp, so it is also probably mostly wrappers for C functions. -- Frank Christoph Next Solution Co. Tel: 0424-98-1811 christo@nextsolution.co.jp Fax: 0424-98-1500