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 KAA14145; Mon, 18 Jun 2001 10:35:43 +0200 (MET DST) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: (from weis@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id KAA14012 for caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr; Mon, 18 Jun 2001 10:35:42 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id QAA14092 for ; Fri, 15 Jun 2001 16:16:52 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from ns.bagley.org (ns.bagley.org [216.30.46.2]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f5FEGp524878 for ; Fri, 15 Jun 2001 16:16:51 +0200 (MET DST) Received: by ns.bagley.org (TRS/80 Mail Daemon, from userid 500) id 3B1B8FBA63; Fri, 15 Jun 2001 09:16:51 -0500 (CDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15146.6355.99793.92385@ns.bagley.org> Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 09:16:51 -0500 (CDT) To: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] ocaml complexity From: Doug Bagley X-Face: "|NaWfYJ-]P="T#?R.9}QgGuFXUd@3vi[.E2q-;"NV3+k_y@zreL2w^ts0XPXtt9^9{uQ@.cu2GgUgK9@HXC\a}Rtah}0'eT~>or7[~Hd?;!\Bpo#"3w>0a0ft-MvvZ In-Reply-To: <3B2A0D7B.12E32F11@online.no> References: <3B2A0D7B.12E32F11@online.no> X-Mailer: VM 6.75 under 21.2 (beta43) "Terspichore" XEmacs Lucid Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk Tore Lund wrote: > The one thing that definitely needs fixing if OCaml is ever to catch on > is the *name*. For my own part it took some time before my brain even > registered that there was such a language, and I am sure this was due to > the unwieldy abbreviation "OCaml" - it looks like a typo or line noise > the first time you see it. I respectfully disagree! OCaml is a wonderful name. Consider how much easier it is to find OCaml resources via a search engine, compared to C#, or C--, for example :-) > Audially, few people would realize that "oh camel" refers to a computer > language. In fact, in most European languages it is probably heard as a > chivalrous way to address a camel ... > > One might choose a new name like "Milner", "Weis", "Leroy", etc. But if > rocking the boat that much is not acceptable, just "Caml" would be much > better than "OCaml", and "Camel" would be even better. It is strange but this same idea just popped up on comp.lang.tcl ... "Tcl isn't popular ... it must be because the name isn't sexy!" (See thread: http://groups.google.com/groups?ic=1&th=62d53dbb9f3ebba1,32) I think it is far more important to have good marketing, good introductory materials, some killer apps/libraries, and a vigorous and helpful user community. Cheers, Doug ------------------- Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr