From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id NAA27026; Wed, 14 Apr 2004 13:12:57 +0200 (MET DST) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id NAA26574 for ; Wed, 14 Apr 2004 13:12:56 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from smtp1.adl2.internode.on.net (smtp1.adl2.internode.on.net [203.16.214.181]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i3EBDsjq015354 for ; Wed, 14 Apr 2004 13:13:55 +0200 Received: from [192.168.1.200] (ppp116-94.lns1.syd2.internode.on.net [150.101.116.94]) by smtp1.adl2.internode.on.net (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i3EBCjZq091632; Wed, 14 Apr 2004 20:42:45 +0930 (CST) Subject: Re: [Caml-list] suggestion: do not link to www.ocaml.org From: skaller Reply-To: skaller@users.sourceforge.net To: Kenneth Knowles Cc: "Brandon J. Van Every" , caml-list In-Reply-To: <20040414053414.GA25712@tallman.kefka.frap.net> References: <20040414053414.GA25712@tallman.kefka.frap.net> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1081941163.20677.652.camel@pelican> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.2 (1.2.2-4) Date: 14 Apr 2004 21:12:44 +1000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Miltered: at nez-perce by Joe's j-chkmail ("http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr")! X-Loop: caml-list@inria.fr X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 sourceforge:01 2004:99 knowles:99 2004:99 brandon:99 haskell:01 pre-alpha:01 referential:01 9660:01 glebe:01 ocaml:01 ocaml:01 0700,:01 nsw:01 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 320 On Wed, 2004-04-14 at 15:34, Kenneth Knowles wrote: > On Tue, Apr 13, 2004 at 04:25:45PM -0700, Brandon J. Van Every wrote: > > A number of other languages have the features, and some have > > much better libraries, packages, and industrial provenness. What OCaml > > apparently has is performance. > > Haskell is the only non-ML language I am familiar with that has similar features > to OCaml, could you share some others? I'm always interested in new languages > with advanced safety features. You could look at Felix .. if you really are interested in a new (pre-alpha) language. You won't find 'advanced safety', heck, even Ocaml doesn't have "20 years old" safety features like referential transparency *** If you want high performance and ease of integration with existing C/C++ code, you may be interest though. The main theoretical constraint at the moment is that polymorphism is compile time only. *** Felix functions may not have side-effects, however functions can depend on variables. -- John Skaller, mailto:skaller@users.sf.net voice: 061-2-9660-0850, snail: PO BOX 401 Glebe NSW 2037 Australia Checkout the Felix programming language http://felix.sf.net ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners