[MLton] Re: [Caml-list] Comparison of OCaml and MLton for numerics

[skaller]

On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 15:31 +0800, Yuanchen Zhu wrote:
> > > The new running time is:
> > >
> > > Ocaml (unsafe) : user: 21.477s, real: 23.366s
> >
> > What is the running time for safe OCaml?
> 
> Safe OCaml adds another 4.5s.
> 
> >
> > > which is much in line with MLton:
> > >
> > > MLton (safe):  user:  17.981s, real: 21.968s

http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~yzhu/hdrRc.tar.bz2

Results on my box, amd64 single core 3200 Athlon, 1MG, Ubuntu 7.04:
remove the -align 8 from mlton, it crashes the experimental build,
remove -ffast-math from ocaml, this is not a valid option for 3.10:

MLton:        27.15
Unsafe Ocaml: 19.59
Safe Ocaml:   21.38

Note the mlton amd64 build is NOT optimised for machine
level performance (it's a bootstrap build being checked for
correctness).

-- 
John Skaller <skaller at users dot sf dot net>
Felix, successor to C++: http://felix.sf.net