From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: weis Received: (from weis@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id LAA10118 for caml-redistribution; Thu, 12 Aug 1999 11:58:10 +0200 (MET DST) 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 XAA20700 for ; Fri, 30 Jul 1999 23:30:21 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from fiji01.liquidmarket.com (oahu02.liquidmarket.com [208.244.147.130]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id XAA22738 for ; Fri, 30 Jul 1999 23:30:20 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from maui02.liquidmarket.com (maui02.liquidmarket.com [192.168.1.65]) by fiji01.liquidmarket.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA05661; Fri, 30 Jul 1999 14:30:15 -0700 Message-Id: <199907302130.OAA05661@fiji01.liquidmarket.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0.2 From: Francois Rouaix To: STARYNKEVITCH Basile cc: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: convincing management to switch to Ocaml In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 28 Jul 1999 16:47:34 +0200." <14239.6150.864319.797849@gargle.gargle.HOWL> Reply-To: frouaix@liquidmarket.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Date: Fri, 30 Jul 1999 14:30:05 -0700 Sender: weis > Does any one have clues or positive experience about convincing > management to switch to Ocaml? > My manager's arguments are: > > * There is an existing (important) code base (a static C code > analyser) coded in C and C++ and it is unreasonable to recode it. Interface OCaml to the C code (C++ is harder if you use exception) if that makes sense (but maybe it doesn't). > * Ocaml is a slow implentation Can be refuted. ocamlopt is not that bad, and brings more advantages (e.g. symbolic-manipulation requires decent and safe memory allocation, safe typing and all that). > * Ocaml is hard to learn for people (fluent in C++) with less than a PhD > in computer science (unfortunately for me, I do hold a PhD in > Artif. Intel.) Simple test: throw the OCaml distribution at a C++ engineer, ask the guy to write a semi-simple program in it. Chances are the engineer will be able to do that in one afternoon (including installing the compiler). This is based on a true story (tech due diligence on us by people we're working with, I can't disclose the name). > * Ocaml might not last long (but ESPRIT projects don't last neither) True, but the compiler is stable. How often do you need to update the compiler ? > ESPRIT projects are supposed to be preindustrial and OCaml is only academic How many ESPRIT projects actually produce code that is being used ? --f