Debian version of MLton
Stephen Weeks
MLton@sourcelight.com
Thu, 23 Aug 2001 19:55:55 -0700
> As to having to use SML/NJ or MLton to bootstrap up, is that really true?
> Would, for instance, Moscow ML really be too horribly slow even for just the
> bootstrap?
Yes. They have terrible space and time performance problems in their module
elaborator. Like exponentially bad.
I'm not sure the Kit is as bad, but I wouldn't be surprised. The MLton style of
writing signatures is not common, and you have to do a lot of tricks in the
elaborator to handle it efficiently. SML/NJ does 'em, and so will MLton
whenever I write it.
> That reminds me, I meant to ask you about Hamlet. I saw that you had used it
> for something (maybe a benchmark). Did you try to give it MLton to compile
> or would that really take infinite time?
I didn't try it. But there is no way he put the necessary tricks into his
elaborator. And even if that were fixed, the factor of probably >20 for running
G0 makes it infeasible.
I'd say the next most likely candidate is the ML Kit, but it doesn't seem worth
spending time on. I'd rather move to a state where we are self sufficient, and
can compile new versions of MLton with old ones.