retro-httpaf-bench VS dune

I do. The benchmark results itself is here: https://aws1.discourse-cdn.com/standard11/uploads/ocaml/opti.... This comes from the OCaml multicore monthly news, the october 2021 edition: https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/multicore-ocaml-october-2021/882.... The benchmark's repo is here: https://github.com/ocaml-multicore/retro-httpaf-bench. However that image is not the whole story, and there's a bit more info here: https://watch.ocaml.org/videos/watch/74ece0a8-380f-4e2a-bef5.... In that video, the author says that the result vary depending on the load (sometimes Rust Hyper can end up above OCaml httpaf eio), that OCaml currently uses an io-uring backend while Rust doesn't, and that the results are for single core as previous OCaml implementations are single-core themselves.

I do feel that this benchmark is incomplete. I'd like it to see the results while using all of the cores of a machine, and I'd like to see different type of loads. I do think that the results are impressive: performance between Go and Rust is great. I do hope that it stays this way with multicore.

We don't compare against Go pervasively. Benchmarking across languages is hard generally, but here is a result on a specific benchmark comparing several versions of OCaml benchmarks against Go and Rust on a Http server benchmark: https://github.com/ocaml-multicore/retro-httpaf-bench/pull/1....

If there are suggestions to make the Go and Rust versions, please feel free to tell us how in the issue tracker.

multicore already faster than Go

Multicore is coming along, you can read the latest news here: https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/multicore-ocaml-june-2021/8134

In terms of performance, there is this paper https://kcsrk.info/papers/system_effects_feb_18.pdf where on a single core async OCaml and effect OCaml are close to Go's net/http, and there is also this project https://github.com/ocaml-multicore/retro-httpaf-bench but I haven't see any results from it.

If you are using the dune build system, add the tag(s) to your dune-project file's package stanza. E.g.:

One way to get around this is to modify the api/dune file with (include_subdirs qualified); this means that every subdirectory of api/ can be referenced by module namespacing and we don't have to write dune files for every route (or pages) folder. However, the OCaml LSP does not like it and red squiggles will show up in the editor (although the app with still compile without errors). Trying to develop the app knowing those red squiggles cannot be vanquished would drive me nuts, so instead of using (include_subdirs qualified) I just wrote dune files for every route (and page) which gets rid of the red squiggles.

2) Neither would having all source/targets specified, as that would entail listing them all in the dune file as wildcard rules is apparently still not a thing: https://github.com/ocaml/dune/issues/307

There is a small example on the dune home page: https://dune.build/

Dune (https://dune.build/) is the preeminent build tool for OCaml development. I don't love its input syntax (s-expressions), and I sometimes miss the ability to write high-level functions to reduce boilerplate (especially for unit tests), but it always gets the dependencies right, and it's fast. This is in stark contrast to some of my experiences with various other build systems, and I am super happy that the default option for OCaml build systems is so good.

It's still weird because dune's own site only makes Jane Street references: https://dune.build/.

ONE of the big benefits of OCaml is its powerful REPL (also called the toplevel), the interactive command-line utility where you can load modules, type in and execute code, and see its results. The modern REPL, utop, has powerful auto-completion and integration with the build system dune, which enables productive workflows like loading an entire project's libraries in the REPL and interactively exploring them.