4 ms·

Author here, just created a new account : ). I think ocamlscript is complementary to js_of_ocaml, actually it is inspired from js_of_ocaml. For those who like t

by hongboz 11y ago

Author here, just created a new account : ). I think ocamlscript is complementary to js_of_ocaml, actually it is inspired from js_of_ocaml. For those who like to write ocaml only application, js_of_ocaml is perfect, ocamlscript is designed to help easier integration with existing javascript system. Design goals here: http://bloomberg.github.io/ocamlscript/ http://bloomberg.github.io/ocamlscript/

Drup 11y ago
That is how you justify the project, and it makes sense, when you look at it with a microscope. But my remark still stand: we now have two compilers to js, their API/FFI is not the same, so you can't factorize work, and the integration work could be made on js_of_ocaml too (see alain frisch's project).
- jordwalke 11y ago
  Hi Drup, I'd be curious to hear about the work that Alain is doing. Do you have a link?
  - Drup 11y ago
    There you go : https://github.com/LexiFi/gen_js_api https://github.com/LexiFi/gen_js_api
    - hongboz 11y ago
      actually we have great relationship with Lexifi, and we did exchange some ideas about ocamlscript before, I think mostly we are on the same page, there is enough room for two compilers :-)
truncate 11y ago
Its good to see ocaml->js back to life. Have you considered supporting TCO or arbitrarily deep stack? I'm just curious how often could we reuse ocaml libraries with just tail call to loop conversion.
- hongboz 11y ago
  self tail call is supported. mutual recursive tailcall can be done partially, but there is not a strong guarantee
cannam 11y ago
In the (nice) immutable map example on that page, a reference cell is used & updated each time something is added to the map. How would the JS output differ if you built the map using a fold or similar, without any refs?
- jordwalke 11y ago
  Before that, I'd ask if the implementation of OCaml's map is at all similar to the implementation of Immutable.js's Map. Different internal data structures/algorithms are probably the most likely explanation for any difference. Still, it's nice to see a benchmark that shows how OCaml compiled to JS is competitive in performance, even when compared to a very popular library that is known for performing well.
  - cannam 11y ago
    Also a fair point, and I take your implication that the effect of a change to the outer loop syntax would probably be lost in the noise. It just struck me that using ref cells and loops feels like a concession to writing Javascript-style code in the first place (I grant in this particular case it makes the code more obvious) and I wondered how much difference it actually makes. Is the compiler able to flatten a fold into a similar loop? Or do you get a readable fold call in the JS code and, if so, is it much slower? Or neither?
- hongboz 11y ago
  List.fold_left is compiled into a while loop in ocamlscript. The main reason that I used for loop is that the generated code is the same as hand written js, so the comparison is more reasonable Edit: I am a practical programmer, I am in favor of both for loop and recursion as long as it is readable

by hongboz 11y ago

Drup 11y ago

That is how you justify the project, and it makes sense, when you look at it with a microscope. But my remark still stand: we now have two compilers to js, their API/FFI is not the same, so you can't factorize work, and the integration work could be made on js_of_ocaml too (see alain frisch's project).

jordwalke 11y ago
Hi Drup, I'd be curious to hear about the work that Alain is doing. Do you have a link?
- Drup 11y ago
  There you go : https://github.com/LexiFi/gen_js_api https://github.com/LexiFi/gen_js_api
  - hongboz 11y ago
    actually we have great relationship with Lexifi, and we did exchange some ideas about ocamlscript before, I think mostly we are on the same page, there is enough room for two compilers :-)

truncate 11y ago

Its good to see ocaml->js back to life. Have you considered supporting TCO or arbitrarily deep stack? I'm just curious how often could we reuse ocaml libraries with just tail call to loop conversion.

hongboz 11y ago
self tail call is supported. mutual recursive tailcall can be done partially, but there is not a strong guarantee

cannam 11y ago

In the (nice) immutable map example on that page, a reference cell is used & updated each time something is added to the map. How would the JS output differ if you built the map using a fold or similar, without any refs?

jordwalke 11y ago
Before that, I'd ask if the implementation of OCaml's map is at all similar to the implementation of Immutable.js's Map. Different internal data structures/algorithms are probably the most likely explanation for any difference. Still, it's nice to see a benchmark that shows how OCaml compiled to JS is competitive in performance, even when compared to a very popular library that is known for performing well.
- cannam 11y ago
  Also a fair point, and I take your implication that the effect of a change to the outer loop syntax would probably be lost in the noise. It just struck me that using ref cells and loops feels like a concession to writing Javascript-style code in the first place (I grant in this particular case it makes the code more obvious) and I wondered how much difference it actually makes. Is the compiler able to flatten a fold into a similar loop? Or do you get a readable fold call in the JS code and, if so, is it much slower? Or neither?
hongboz 11y ago
List.fold_left is compiled into a while loop in ocamlscript. The main reason that I used for loop is that the generated code is the same as hand written js, so the comparison is more reasonable Edit: I am a practical programmer, I am in favor of both for loop and recursion as long as it is readable