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 WAA22073; Tue, 23 Jul 2002 22:11:24 +0200 (MET DST) Received: (from weis@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id WAA22061 for caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr; Tue, 23 Jul 2002 22:11:23 +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 JAA29529 for ; Sun, 21 Jul 2002 09:27:30 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from swordfish.cs.caltech.edu (swordfish.cs.caltech.edu [131.215.44.124]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id g6L7RTj19886 for ; Sun, 21 Jul 2002 09:27:29 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from orchestra.cs.caltech.edu (orchestra.cs.caltech.edu [131.215.44.20]) by swordfish.cs.caltech.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91185DF263; Sun, 21 Jul 2002 00:27:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from mvanier@localhost) by orchestra.cs.caltech.edu (8.11.6/8.9.3) id g6L7RRb01660; Sun, 21 Jul 2002 00:27:27 -0700 Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2002 00:27:27 -0700 Message-Id: <200207210727.g6L7RRb01660@orchestra.cs.caltech.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: orchestra.cs.caltech.edu: mvanier set sender to mvanier@cs.caltech.edu using -f From: Michael Vanier To: bemann@execpc.com Cc: caml-list@inria.fr In-reply-to: <20020721002549.A752@execpc.com> (message from Travis Bemann on Sun, 21 Jul 2002 00:25:49 -0400) Subject: Re: [Caml-list] ocaml for Mono/.NET? References: <200207170731.g6H7VqA25845@orchestra.cs.caltech.edu> <20020721002549.A752@execpc.com> Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk > Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2002 00:25:49 -0400 > From: Travis Bemann > > On Wed, Jul 17, 2002 at 12:31:52AM -0700, Michael Vanier wrote: > > > > Are there any plans to port ocaml to .NET? Given that the Mono > > implementation of .NET is coming along nicely, having an ocaml compiler > > that can compile to .NET IL would greatly increase ocaml's visibility, not > > to mention solving some of the library and packaging issues that keep > > coming up with ocaml. I know about the F# project, but that implementati= > on > > appears to be only for a subset of ocaml, and is controlled by Microsoft. > > I'd be happier with something from the core ocaml team. Of course, MY > > motivation is that I'd like to be able to write nifty graphical apps in > > ocaml under Linux. After all, once you learn ocaml, C# is not really very > > tempting ;-) > > The thing is that this subset is FORCED by the inherent design of the > CLR/.NET bytecode virtual machine, which doesn't support stuff like > parameterized modules. Any attempt to port something like OCaml to > something like CLR/.NET will only result in its bastardization, and > thus the loss of many of its features/advantages. > That's interesting, considering that standard ML is one of the languages supposedly targeted by the common language runtime (by which I mean that the SML team was consulted on what features they would need in the intermediate language in order to support SML). Doesn't SML have parameterized modules? Mike ------------------- 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