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 KAA29306; Wed, 12 Jun 2002 10:21:04 +0200 (MET DST) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f 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 KAA29310 for ; Wed, 12 Jun 2002 10:21:04 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from pauillac.inria.fr (pauillac.inria.fr [128.93.11.35]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id g5C8L3b16825; Wed, 12 Jun 2002 10:21:03 +0200 (MET DST) Received: (from xleroy@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id KAA29302; Wed, 12 Jun 2002 10:21:02 +0200 (MET DST) Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 10:21:02 +0200 From: Xavier Leroy To: Basile STARYNKEVITCH Cc: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Unix.file_descr -> int ??? Message-ID: <20020612102102.C26939@pauillac.inria.fr> References: <20020611213158.A680@max.home> <20020611174527.A14450@pauillac.inria.fr> <15622.64332.518339.259345@is002254.saclay.cea.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0i In-Reply-To: <15622.64332.518339.259345@is002254.saclay.cea.fr>; from basile.starynkevitch@cea.fr on Wed, Jun 12, 2002 at 09:42:04AM +0200 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk > [Passing fd numbers as arguments to exec-ed programs] > This seems a legitimate use of file descriptors (there are some Unix > programs which does that). I won't go into POSIX standards to see whether this is legitimate or not. Yes, some (very few) Unix programs do this. I can't help thinking that it's ugly. At any rate, if you're into that kind of stuff, Cash is for you: http://pauillac.inria.fr/cash/ > The most important debate is: should Ocaml give access to all Unix > ugliness (and dirty tricks)? I think that for pragmatic reasons the > answer should definitely be yes. "Pragmatisme, que de crimes commis en ton nom"... You mean, for pragmatic reasons, you want ioctl() in Caml? With its total lack of typing and portability? > Ocaml targets not only academia but also the real world > (otherwise, the Ocaml consortium has no sense). WARNING! Stereotype alert! So, let's see, according to you, the virtues of type abstraction should be reserved to academia, while the "real world" (whatever the #$@%@ this means) is concerned about dirty hacks and nothing else? What are you going to tell us next? Women can't drive and men can't raise children? :-) I can assure you that in an "industrial" programming setting, guaranteeing (some amount of) Unix-Windows source-code portability is a *lot* more important than the marginal Unix hacks you describe. - Xavier Leroy ------------------- 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