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 987ED7EE80 for ; Sat, 23 Mar 2013 02:15:17 +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: Av0CAMQBTVFUXebjgWdsb2JhbABDiDG9OoFpFg4BARYmKIIkAQEEAQgCGVYFCAMCCRgCAiYCAhkjGwIEHgWHfgqvX5IcgSONdQeCLYETA44vnEM X-IPAS-Result: Av0CAMQBTVFUXebjgWdsb2JhbABDiDG9OoFpFg4BARYmKIIkAQEEAQgCGVYFCAMCCRgCAiYCAhkjGwIEHgWHfgqvX5IcgSONdQeCLYETA44vnEM X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,896,1355094000"; d="scan'208";a="8919898" Received: from avasout01.plus.net ([84.93.230.227]) by mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 23 Mar 2013 02:15:17 +0100 Received: from XPS ([46.208.152.44]) by avasout01 with smtp id EpFF1l0010xjwkW01pFGrP; Sat, 23 Mar 2013 01:15:16 +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=KXr8lQjsJt_OCXtpCu0A:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 a=wENtliGTsFWVwbXJfEkUuw==:117 X-AUTH: jdh302:2500 Reply-To: From: "Jon Harrop" To: =?utf-8?Q?'Daniel_B=C3=BCnzli'?= Cc: 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$@ffconsultancy.com> <01ba01ce2736$e2973280$a7c59780$@ffconsultancy.com> <6C6F2DEFCC284DE9BB3ECC2A62FC8BD6@erratique.ch> <01c401ce274a$785ff1e0$691fd5a0$@ffconsultancy.com> <29025F595E9343479E21A54CC92048AA@erratique.ch> In-Reply-To: <29025F595E9343479E21A54CC92048AA@erratique.ch> Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2013 01:15:34 -0000 Organization: Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. Message-ID: <01fb01ce2763$ec22c3f0$c4684bd0$@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+r723QI62GKhARawPEkBnOjUHAH3h8mSAoXCGLwBsUenxgGCBCflAkVqpIAByr8HAgGyUKAimFA3WkA= Content-Language: en-gb Subject: RE: [Caml-list] Re: Haskell vs OCaml Daniel Bunzli wrote: > Unless I'm mistaken, here around when we say 100% pure OCaml code, > it means code that uses the standard library, 100% pure OCaml modules > and no C bindings or unsafe features like Obj. > AFAIK labgl is not part of the OCaml system. If that software layer was > key to your product you should have ensured that you had some > understanding/control of it -- even if that meant writing your own. How do you reconcile having to reinvent the wheel by writing my own OpenGL = bindings with Yaron's assertion that OCaml is "highly productive"? > More than that you should have realized that while lablgl is fine for > hobby opengl programming, it has obvious shortcomings that makes > it ill suited to develop products on top of it. What shortcomings? > It seems you did something wrong in building your product... Only when I was building my product using OCaml. When I was building my pro= duct using F# instead I apparently didn't do anything wrong. Cheers, Jon.