caml-list - the Caml user's mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Jonathan Coupe" <jonathan@meanwhile.freeserve.co.uk>
To: "Miles Egan" <miles@caddr.com>
Cc: <leary@nwlink.com>, <caml-list@inria.fr>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] ocaml complexity
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2001 23:17:26 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <001c01c0f068$ce193f40$a00bfea9@baby> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20010608133117.A28472@caddr.com>



> On Fri, Jun 08, 2001 at 01:22:44PM -0700, Chris Hecker wrote:
> >
> > Do people actually see the current "market penetration" of ocaml as a
problem?
> > One big problem would be if INRIA didn't think it was popular enough to
> > continue funding it, but anything short of that is not disasterous.  We
might
> > get more libraries and whatnot with more people, but there would be
downsides
> > to more popularity as well.
>
> I certainly don't think Ocaml's popularity or lack thereof is a problem
and I
> agree there advantages in letting it grow at its own pace.  I'm mainly
> interested in increasing its market penetration where I work so I can stop
> writing Python code.
>
> --
> miles
>

Is Ocaml's acceptability at Pixar independent of its use in the larger
marketplace? If so, I'm surprised. (I believed that the opposite was the
case for Lisp, from your comments on cll.) The more people who use a
language, the more useful it is through the availability of tools, libraries
and trained programmers. And yes, the more politically acceptable it is to
decision makers. Which is fair enough - what if INRIA does stop supporting
Caml?

There's also the larger question of our professional responsibility to
society. Software quality is a key (though usual buried) problem for the
modern world. Tools that can improve it are good. Ocaml has significant
potential to do that. I'd hate to see it under used to the extent that CLOS
and Smalltalk are.

Jonathan

-------------------
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs  FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr  Archives: http://caml.inria.fr


  reply	other threads:[~2001-06-08 22:08 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 61+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2001-06-07  8:58 leary
2001-06-07 18:29 ` Jonathan Coupe
2001-06-08  9:41   ` leary
2001-06-08 10:05     ` Why is Ocaml better than Java (WAS: [Caml-list] ocaml complexity) Mattias Waldau
2001-06-08 13:31       ` Pierre Weis
2001-06-08 16:37         ` William Chesters
2001-06-08 21:39       ` Brian Rogoff
     [not found]       ` <Pine.BSF.4.21.0106081430070.27414-100000@shell5.ba.best.co m>
2001-06-08 22:16         ` Chris Hecker
2001-06-08 12:27     ` [Caml-list] ocaml complexity Jonathan Coupe
2001-06-08 20:22       ` Chris Hecker
2001-06-08 20:31         ` Miles Egan
2001-06-08 22:17           ` Jonathan Coupe [this message]
2001-06-08 22:18             ` Miles Egan
2001-06-11 14:05             ` Pierre Weis
2001-06-09 19:41           ` John Max Skaller
2001-06-08 22:59         ` David Fox
2001-06-09  0:43         ` leary
2001-06-09  1:09           ` Mark Wotton
2001-06-09  8:36           ` Markus Mottl
2001-06-09 20:58           ` John Max Skaller
2001-06-08 22:46       ` leary
2001-06-09  1:18         ` David Fox
2001-06-12 14:17           ` John Max Skaller
2001-06-13 15:21             ` Brian Rogoff
2001-06-13 20:32               ` leary
2001-06-13 22:58                 ` Johann Höchtl
2001-06-13 21:18               ` John Max Skaller
2001-06-09 22:32         ` Jonathan Coupe
2001-06-11  0:20           ` leary
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2001-06-14 16:04 John R Harrison
2001-06-13 21:04 David Gurr
2001-06-13 23:13 ` leary
2001-06-13 23:19 ` Brian Rogoff
2001-06-15 13:28   ` Tore Lund
2001-06-15 14:03     ` Nils Goesche
2001-06-15 14:54       ` Xavier Leroy
2001-06-15 15:14         ` Jonathan Coupe
2001-06-15 15:23         ` Nils Goesche
2001-06-15 17:38         ` Sven LUTHER
2001-06-15 20:36           ` Remi VANICAT
2001-06-15 14:16     ` Doug Bagley
2001-06-28 12:54   ` Didier Remy
2001-06-28 18:31     ` Brian Rogoff
2001-06-11 20:33 Arturo Borquez
2001-06-11 21:17 ` Miles Egan
2001-06-12  7:19   ` wester
2001-06-06 16:50 Miles Egan
2001-06-06 17:30 ` Chris Hecker
2001-06-06 18:25 ` Charles Martin
2001-06-06 19:27   ` Michael Hicks
2001-06-06 21:15   ` David Fox
2001-06-07 12:25   ` FabienFleutot
2001-06-08  0:27   ` Miles Egan
2001-06-06 19:36 ` William Chesters
2001-06-06 19:55   ` John Max Skaller
2001-06-06 20:06     ` William Chesters
2001-06-07 16:30       ` John Max Skaller
2001-06-08  0:32   ` Miles Egan
2001-06-08  0:56     ` David Fox
2001-06-07  7:35 ` wester
2001-06-07 17:27   ` John Max Skaller

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='001c01c0f068$ce193f40$a00bfea9@baby' \
    --to=jonathan@meanwhile.freeserve.co.uk \
    --cc=caml-list@inria.fr \
    --cc=leary@nwlink.com \
    --cc=miles@caddr.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).