From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Original-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr Received: from mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.83]) by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4FF4C7EE80 for ; Fri, 22 Mar 2013 20:52:54 +0100 (CET) Received-SPF: None (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of jon@ffconsultancy.com) identity=pra; client-ip=84.93.230.227; receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="jon@ffconsultancy.com"; x-sender="jon@ffconsultancy.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: None (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of jon@ffconsultancy.com) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=84.93.230.227; receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="jon@ffconsultancy.com"; x-sender="jon@ffconsultancy.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: None (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of postmaster@avasout01.plus.net) identity=helo; client-ip=84.93.230.227; receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="jon@ffconsultancy.com"; x-sender="postmaster@avasout01.plus.net"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AogCAJe1TFFUXebjgWdsb2JhbABDiC2rH5IJgWUWDgEBFiYogiQBAQUIAhlLFwEDAgkRBAEBAwIJGgMCAhkjCQEJCAIEARILBQKHcAMTCK9miDkDiWWBI412BoIngRMDji+JVJJv X-IPAS-Result: AogCAJe1TFFUXebjgWdsb2JhbABDiC2rH5IJgWUWDgEBFiYogiQBAQUIAhlLFwEDAgkRBAEBAwIJGgMCAhkjCQEJCAIEARILBQKHcAMTCK9miDkDiWWBI412BoIngRMDji+JVJJv X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,893,1355094000"; d="scan'208";a="8900265" Received: from avasout01.plus.net ([84.93.230.227]) by mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 22 Mar 2013 20:52:53 +0100 Received: from XPS ([46.208.152.44]) by avasout01 with smtp id Ejsr1l0060xjwkW01jss4m; Fri, 22 Mar 2013 19:52:53 +0000 X-CM-Score: 0.00 X-CNFS-Analysis: v=2.0 cv=HO4d4PRv c=1 sm=1 a=wENtliGTsFWVwbXJfEkUuw==:17 a=PcxEMZpPzg4A:10 a=Xub9RBUEA-sA:10 a=Kvk-SOs2Z7YA:10 a=IkcTkHD0fZMA:10 a=r2vSxAw-AAAA:8 a=fP-f-03R_oAA:10 a=ZOzjf2MOAAAA:8 a=CjxXgO3LAAAA:8 a=thESiGn_GZ8KBuSRm1AA:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 a=wENtliGTsFWVwbXJfEkUuw==:117 X-AUTH: jdh302:2500 Reply-To: From: "Jon Harrop" To: =?utf-8?Q?'Daniel_B=C3=BCnzli'?= , References: <878v5lca2c.fsf@li195-236.members.linode.com> <9813208.KJBpLPkkvX@groupon> <069c01ce25ab$a9cf3f10$fd6dbd30$@ffconsultancy.com> <06b901ce25ca$cc415be0$64c413a0$@ffconsultancy.com> <514B81CB.3070103@etorok.net> <01a501ce2725$f3e530c0$dbaf9240$@ffconsultancy.com> In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2013 19:53:10 -0000 Organization: Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. Message-ID: <01ba01ce2736$e2973280$a7c59780$@ffconsultancy.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQGbDIvrQFC0hqYsznfX8ZeLYj+sAAGro33jAwUx/+kB+r723QI62GKhARawPEkBnOjUHAH3h8mSAoXCGLwBsUenxpiKD9oQ Content-Language: en-gb Subject: RE: [Caml-list] Re: Haskell vs OCaml In what sense? -----Original Message----- From: caml-list-request@inria.fr [mailto:caml-list-request@inria.fr] On Beh= alf Of Daniel B=C3=BCnzli Sent: 22 March 2013 18:47 To: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Re: Haskell vs OCaml Le vendredi, 22 mars 2013 =C3=A0 18:51, Jon Harrop a =C3=A9crit : > No but I suspect it was related to OpenGL and I doubt it would affect=20 > standalone OCaml applications. This seems to contradict : Le jeudi, 21 mars 2013 =C3=A0 01:26, Jon Harrop a =C3=A9crit : > We were forced to drop Presenta when we found that around 80% of beta=20 > testers experienced segmentation faults even though it was 100% pure OCam= l code. =20=20 Daniel -- Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management and archives: https://sympa.inria.fr/sympa/arc/caml-list Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs=3D