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 LAA05492; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 11:57:38 +0200 (MET DST) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id LAA07717 for ; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 11:57:37 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from gateway.imperium.ph ([202.175.240.154]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id i8S9vXYp030164 for ; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 11:57:36 +0200 Received: from morgoth.imperium.ph (morgoth.imperium.ph [192.168.1.224]) by gateway.imperium.ph (Postfix) with SMTP id AB47D46CFD; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 17:46:54 +0800 (PHT) Received: by morgoth.imperium.ph (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Tue, 28 Sep 2004 17:55:07 +0800 Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 17:55:07 +0800 From: "Rafael 'Dido' Sevilla" To: Keith Wansbrough Cc: John Goerzen , caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Observations on OCaml vs. Haskell Message-ID: <20040928095507.GB2792@imperium.ph> References: <20040927202449.GA548@imperium.ph> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Operating-System: Linux morgoth 2.4.26-gentoo-r9 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 4159358D.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Loop: caml-list@inria.fr X-Spam: no; 0.00; rafael:01 'dido':01 dido:01 caml-list:01 observations:01 haskell:01 2004:99 boxing:01 unboxing:01 idioms:01 idioms:01 shootout:01 dido:01 ocaml:01 ocaml:01 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk On Tue, Sep 28, 2004 at 10:31:31AM +0100, Keith Wansbrough wrote: > But it's true that for text-handling performance in GHC you have to > use something other than list-of-Char; typically you use PackedString, > which is basically an array of bytes. The boxing and unboxing > certainly has significant cost. > And then you can't use the idioms that the parent poster so desires, and you revert to using similar, and apparently even slightly more cumbersome, programming idioms as you would to manage strings in OCaml. That was the whole point of bringing up the Shootout benchmarks. From the code it appears they used strings as list-of-Char, allowing the kind of pattern matching and other manipulations the parent poster talks about. -- dido Te capiam, cuniculus sceleste! ------------------- 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