Re: [Caml-list] Re: HLVM?

On Saturday 26 September 2009 21:23:32 Sylvain Le Gall wrote: > On 26-09-2009, David McClain wrote: > > Can you provide some gratis information about what makes HLVM so well > > suited to scientific computing? Something that might prompt one to > > actually subscribe to your journal? > > If I am n

Re: [Caml-list] HLVM

On Saturday 26 September 2009 18:21:21 David McClain wrote: > What, in particular, sets HLVM apart. Surely not just the native > machine types? JIT compilation opens up several hugely-productive optimizations: 1. Polymorphism no longer persists to run-time so there is no need for a uniform repre

[Caml-list] Re: HLVM?

Hello, On 26-09-2009, David McClain wrote: > > Can you provide some gratis information about what makes HLVM so well > suited to scientific computing? Something that might prompt one to > actually subscribe to your journal? > If I am not wrong, you can access source code of HLVM from here: h

[Caml-list] Objective Caml and Norton Antivirus 2010

Dear List, I'm not sure if I'm complaining about ocaml or antivirus programs, but I've had quite a lot of trouble with the two interacting. First it was Avira Antivir flagging every single ocaml compiled program as a threat. I had to get rid of it, and I got Norton 2009, which worked fine. Now

[Caml-list] HLVM

Yes, I saw those references already. Still not enough information... What, in particular, sets HLVM apart. Surely not just the native machine types? Are you handling array references in some unusually efficient manner? Are you avoiding unnecessary copy-on-writes of large arrays by some fo

Re: [Caml-list] HLVM?

On Saturday 26 September 2009 17:33:41 David McClain wrote: > Hello Jon, > > I searched around for information on HLVM, and what, in particular, > makes it so well suited for scientific computing. I also have a long- > standing interest in scientific computing and OCaml, dating back to > 1999 when

[Caml-list] New approaches?

Hi, While I want to extend a hearty congratulations to the OC4MC team for an effort well done! I also want to point out some other approaches... Here is a link to a paper about a "new" approach to SMP multicores as well as distributed heterogenous systems, being developed by MS Research a

Re: [Caml-list] OC4MC : OCaml for Multicore architectures

On Saturday 26 September 2009 14:51:21 kche...@math.carleton.ca wrote: > > On Saturday 26 September 2009 01:45:50 kche...@math.carleton.ca wrote: > >> Perhaps an off-topic and naive question: What does it take to beat F# > >> and > >> still have predictable performance? > > > > Provided you're talk

Re: [Caml-list] OC4MC : OCaml for Multicore architectures

> On Saturday 26 September 2009 01:45:50 kche...@math.carleton.ca wrote: >> Perhaps an off-topic and naive question: What does it take to beat F# >> and >> still have predictable performance? > > Provided you're talking abouts today's machines and don't care about pause > times, HLVM with a paralle

Re: [Caml-list] Generation of Java code from OCaml

On Thu, 24 Sep 2009 14:02:14 +0200 blue storm wrote: > What about factorising json-static to allow adding arbitrary code > generators (represented as functions from (string * type_def) list to > a camlp4 Ast) at camlp4-time ? You would have a design similar to > type-conv, wich allows adding new

Re: [Caml-list] OC4MC : OCaml for Multicore architectures

On Friday 25 September 2009 22:39:42 Jon Harrop wrote: > On Friday 25 September 2009 05:07:21 Jacques Garrigue wrote: > > Hashtables in Python are a basic feature of the language, > > and they are of course implemented in C. In ocaml, they are > > implemented in ocaml (except the hashing function,

[Caml-list] HLVM?

Hello Jon, I searched around for information on HLVM, and what, in particular, makes it so well suited for scientific computing. I also have a long- standing interest in scientific computing and OCaml, dating back to 1999 when I created my NML system. However, wherever I found a reference