From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.82]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73832BBAF for ; Mon, 21 Dec 2009 15:36:32 +0100 (CET) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Ap4CAFMXL0vU436rkWdsb2JhbACBSpoIAQEBAQkLCgcTA7lpAoQsBA X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.47,431,1257116400"; d="scan'208";a="42530206" Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.171]) by mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 21 Dec 2009 15:36:31 +0100 Received: from office1.lan.sumadev.de (dslb-084-059-066-217.pools.arcor-ip.net [84.59.66.217]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (node=mreu2) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0LeQLR-1Nns2t39Vl-00qA99; Mon, 21 Dec 2009 15:36:30 +0100 Received: from [192.168.5.104] (dslb-084-059-066-217.pools.arcor-ip.net [84.59.66.217]) by office1.lan.sumadev.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7BFDEC0E8E; Mon, 21 Dec 2009 15:36:30 +0100 (CET) Subject: Re: [Caml-list] general question, was Re: OCaml is broken From: Gerd Stolpmann To: Keyan Cc: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr In-Reply-To: <8D2436E9-A41B-48D4-B844-A82E57D47CA2@pulsschlag.net> References: <4B2D2BC1.6020204@msu.edu> <200912200443.57698.jon@ffconsultancy.com> <200912201938.06729.jon@ffconsultancy.com> <20091221152631.35b3a2eb@pbmiha.malagasy.com> <8D2436E9-A41B-48D4-B844-A82E57D47CA2@pulsschlag.net> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2009 15:42:12 +0100 Message-Id: <1261406532.18486.26.camel@flake.lan.gerd-stolpmann.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.12.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+BVT5XvAgSA5mbodvFqW6IcmLTQaayQaTjBBW t4KE4pJMg6UcO+LUpzEkKpiTotCPu6snQK4jgMjvAkFvNs9APV iMzYDPALy9qn1CiEQNDhw== X-Spam: no; 0.00; ocaml:01 gerd:01 stolpmann:01 gerd:01 planing:01 ocaml:01 extensively:01 stolpmann:01 darmstadt:01 6151:01 6151:01 propaganda:98 compile:01 symbolic:01 caml-list:01 Am Montag, den 21.12.2009, 15:19 +0100 schrieb Keyan: > Hi, > > i have a large project written in C++, for which i am planing to write add-ons and tools in ocaml, e.g. different tools to analyse my code (dependency stuff), an interpreter for a script-language i plan to include, etc, etc. form my time at the uni i remembered that ocaml allows to compile libraries which can be included in c/c++ program, and i know people who use it extensively in other projects. therefore, i decided to give ocaml a try. i like functional programming, and my first steps with ocaml are very promising. > > following this discussion, i am not so sure anymore, if ocaml is a good decision. may be i got this discussion wrong, but if ocaml is dying out, i might have to look for another functional programming language to use with my project. > > please dont take this email as an offence. i am just curious. at this point, i can still easily look for an alternative to ocaml, so its best to ask now. Please don't believe Jon's propaganda. He has just very specific needs (high performance computing on desktops), and generalizes them in the way "it's not perfect for me anymore, so it's bad anyway". He has been doing that for years now, not seeing that he really harms the way ocaml is seen by newcomers. The examples you mention are good matches for using ocaml - symbolic programming with lots of terms and trees. That's the stuff ocaml was originally developed for, and it delivers excellence performance. Also, ocaml is still backed by INRIA, and there is still a large community, including a growing number of industrial users. Gerd -- ------------------------------------------------------------ Gerd Stolpmann, Bad Nauheimer Str.3, 64289 Darmstadt,Germany gerd@gerd-stolpmann.de http://www.gerd-stolpmann.de Phone: +49-6151-153855 Fax: +49-6151-997714 ------------------------------------------------------------