1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
|
<!DOCTYPE html>
<html lang="en">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<meta name="generator" content="AsciiDoc 8.6.8">
<title>OCaml</title>
<link rel="stylesheet" href="./asciidoc.css" type="text/css">
<link rel="stylesheet" href="./pygments.css" type="text/css">
<script type="text/javascript" src="./asciidoc.js"></script>
<script type="text/javascript">
/*<![CDATA[*/
asciidoc.install();
/*]]>*/
</script>
<link rel="stylesheet" href="./mlton.css" type="text/css"/>
</head>
<body class="article">
<div id="banner">
<div id="banner-home">
<a href="./Home">MLton 20130715</a>
</div>
</div>
<div id="header">
<h1>OCaml</h1>
</div>
<div id="content">
<div id="preamble">
<div class="sectionbody">
<div class="paragraph"><p><a href="http://caml.inria.fr/">OCaml</a> is a variant of <a href="ML">ML</a> and is similar to
<a href="StandardML">Standard ML</a>.</p></div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="sect1">
<h2 id="_ocaml_and_sml">OCaml and SML</h2>
<div class="sectionbody">
<div class="paragraph"><p>Here’s a comparison of some aspects of the OCaml and SML languages.</p></div>
<div class="ulist"><ul>
<li>
<p>
Standard ML has a formal <a href="DefinitionOfStandardML">Definition</a>, while
OCaml is specified by its lone implementation and informal
documentation.
</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>
Standard ML has a number of <a href="StandardMLImplementations">compilers</a>,
while OCaml has only one.
</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>
OCaml has built-in support for object-oriented programming, while
Standard ML does not (however, see <a href="ObjectOrientedProgramming">ObjectOrientedProgramming</a>).
</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>
Andreas Rossberg has a
<a href="http://www.mpi-sws.org/%7Erossberg/sml-vs-ocaml.html">side-by-side
comparison</a> of the syntax of SML and OCaml.
</p>
</li>
</ul></div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="sect1">
<h2 id="_ocaml_and_mlton">OCaml and MLton</h2>
<div class="sectionbody">
<div class="paragraph"><p>Here’s a comparison of some aspects of OCaml and MLton.</p></div>
<div class="ulist"><ul>
<li>
<p>
Performance
</p>
<div class="ulist"><ul>
<li>
<p>
Both OCaml and MLton have excellent performance.
</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>
MLton performs extensive <a href="WholeProgramOptimization">WholeProgramOptimization</a>, which can
provide substantial improvements in large, modular programs.
</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>
MLton uses native types, like 32-bit integers, without any penalty
due to tagging or boxing. OCaml uses 31-bit integers with a penalty
due to tagging, and 32-bit integers with a penalty due to boxing.
</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>
MLton uses native types, like 64-bit floats, without any penalty
due to boxing. OCaml, in some situations, boxes 64-bit floats.
</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>
MLton represents arrays of all types unboxed. In OCaml, only
arrays of 64-bit floats are unboxed, and then only when it is
syntactically apparent.
</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>
MLton represents records compactly by reordering and packing the
fields.
</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>
In MLton, polymorphic and monomorphic code have the same
performance. In OCaml, polymorphism can introduce a performance
penalty.
</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>
In MLton, module boundaries have no impact on performance. In
OCaml, moving code between modules can cause a performance penalty.
</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>
MLton’s <a href="ForeignFunctionInterface">ForeignFunctionInterface</a> is simpler than OCaml’s.
</p>
</li>
</ul></div>
</li>
<li>
<p>
Tools
</p>
<div class="ulist"><ul>
<li>
<p>
OCaml has a debugger, while MLton does not.
</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>
OCaml supports separate compilation, while MLton does not.
</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>
OCaml compiles faster than MLton.
</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>
MLton supports profiling of both time and allocation.
</p>
</li>
</ul></div>
</li>
<li>
<p>
Libraries
</p>
<div class="ulist"><ul>
<li>
<p>
OCaml has more available libraries.
</p>
</li>
</ul></div>
</li>
<li>
<p>
Community
</p>
<div class="ulist"><ul>
<li>
<p>
OCaml has a larger community than MLton.
</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>
MLton has a very responsive
<a href="http://www.mlton.org/mailman/listinfo/mlton">developer list</a>.
</p>
</li>
</ul></div>
</li>
</ul></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div id="footnotes"><hr></div>
<div id="footer">
<div id="footer-text">
</div>
<div id="footer-badges">
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>
|
