Laurent Deniau wrote:
Henning Thielemann wrote:
On Tue, 13 Nov 2007, Jon Harrop wrote:
On Tuesday 13 November 2007 08:41, Henning Thielemann wrote:
On Tue, 13 Nov 2007, Jon Harrop wrote:
Penetration is highest in parts of industry where small groups of
talented programmers get together, most notably startups. Look at
XenSource, Wolfram Research, The MathWorks,
?? Mathematica and MatLab are just the opposite of statically safe
programming.
Absolutely. I was referring to a prototype Mathematica JIT compiler
(developed
in OCaml),
interesting
the FFT routines in MATLAB (FFTW: written in OCaml) and the SML software
that The MathWorks sell.
I see, but FFTW was not developed by MathWorks, but by Matteo Frigo and
Steven G. Johnson (says fftw.org),
Right, and it is not written in OCaml but in C. The OCaml code
_generates_ optimized C code for the arch where it matters.
That sounds like 'written in ocaml' to me.
That's no more written in C than java code is written in assembly, just
because the JIT generates optimised assembly code...
I would say it's "written in" the language which the authors wrote it.
The fact that they wrote it to generate some C code and then compile it:
well, they're just a clever bunch :-)
Jules
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
