Isaac Gouy wrote:
> Jon Harrop wrote:
>> Isaac Gouy wrote:
>> > (I'm not interested enough to find out, but I suspect stdout is at
>> > minimum line-buffered.)
>>
>> Sure, the naive implementations in other languages are doing silly things
>> as well (like the OCaml flushing after every line) but they are still
>> faster than the most optimised Java to date.
> 
> afaict none of the OCaml implementations work with the data created by
> that Perl script - like the C and Java implementations - why is that?

The authors couldn't be bothered because it is easier to generate that data
in OCaml.

>> > For Java without JIT use the -Xint command line option with the Sun JVM
>> > like this
>> >
>> >    time java -Xint Latin > /dev/null
>>
>> That's as slow as ocamlc.
> 
> as slow as? does that mean faster :-)

No, that means even slower.

-- 
Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy
Objective CAML for Scientists
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/ocaml_for_scientists