Are some functional programming languages ​​syntactically oriented for better performance?

I have heard about a multiple increase in performance using some languages ​​(RoR). I also heard that some virtual machines are more optimal than others (GHC?). Others try to optimize their language of choice by improving the underlying architecture (Unladen Swallow).

However, reading an article (“SSA is functional programming”), I had a question about whether a particular language, by virtue of its syntax (someday), can be a language with better performance.

I assume that I am asking that, be it a particular syntax, THEORETICAL is best suited to get the best machine code. I would be very interested in the fundamental theory of any opinions - I discussed this with some friends, and we knocked on ideas about the information content of a certain syntax.

Please note that I am talking about languages ​​that have at least the first functions of a class - without ASM.

+5
source share
4 answers

. , , , -. , . , . .

-, , Lua (Lua (, ), . , , - , . case switch if s.

+2

- . . " " , , .

, . , .

. , , concurrency, , Erlang.

, , . , Erlang JVM, , ? ? - , .

: , ?

( ), - LLVM, . , , , (, , ).

+3

c vs. ocaml:

Objective-Caml bytecode , C! ? OCaml , , , , . C , , .

, .

+3

GHC Haskell C, , , , C, ? , . , Haskell- > C, , , .

, , , , , ( , ), .

0

All Articles