From: skaller <skaller@users.sourceforge.net>
To: Brian Hurt <bhurt@spnz.org>
Cc: Hellflame <hellflame@hotmail.com>,
Ocaml Mailing List <caml-list@inria.fr>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] OCaml compared as a scripting language
Date: 16 Jun 2004 12:26:45 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1087352804.16811.1386.camel@pelican.wigram> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0406151359560.4243-100000@localhost.localdomain>
On Wed, 2004-06-16 at 06:07, Brian Hurt wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Jun 2004, Hellflame wrote:
>
> Now, the whole situation has reversed. Ocaml's feature of
> immutability/functional programming becomes an advantage in the large,
> while Perl's feature of side effects becomes a disadvantage.
Hmm .. but (a) Perl like most languages can be used
in a functional way to some extent and (b) Ocaml is worse
than Perl, C or C++ or Felix when it comes to side-effects
since there is no syntactic or type system support.
I think the number of constructions needed for a good
programming language are quite small. I also think we
have little idea what they are: clearly we need
a unified account of both functional and stateful
programming perhaps derived by dualising the better
understood functional paradigm.
--
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
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-06-16 2:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-06-15 18:27 Hellflame
2004-06-15 20:07 ` Brian Hurt
2004-06-16 2:26 ` skaller [this message]
2004-06-16 11:00 ` sejourne kevin
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-06-14 9:52 Richard Jones
2004-06-14 15:55 ` Brian Hurt
2004-06-14 16:29 ` Richard Jones
2004-06-15 6:40 ` Florian Hars
2004-06-15 16:13 ` Bruno.Verlyck
2004-06-15 17:15 ` Richard Jones
2004-06-15 17:35 ` John Goerzen
2004-06-15 18:16 ` Karl Zilles
2004-06-15 19:23 ` John Goerzen
2004-06-15 21:17 ` Alex Baretta
2004-06-16 2:12 ` skaller
2004-06-15 17:41 ` Jon Harrop
2004-06-15 17:42 ` William D. Neumann
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=1087352804.16811.1386.camel@pelican.wigram \
--to=skaller@users.sourceforge.net \
--cc=bhurt@spnz.org \
--cc=caml-list@inria.fr \
--cc=hellflame@hotmail.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).