[Caml-list] ocaml for Mono/.NET?

[Caml-list] ocaml for Mono/.NET?

[Michael Vanier]

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 implementation
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 ;-)

Given that the ocaml team are compiler wizards, you'd think that this
wouldn't be that big a deal.  Am I being unrealistic?  Maybe M$ can
underwrite a grant...

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

Re: [Caml-list] ocaml for Mono/.NET?

[Michael Vanier]

> Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2002 00:25:49 -0400
> From: Travis Bemann <bemann@execpc.com>
> 
> 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

Re: [Caml-list] ocaml for Mono/.NET?

[Xavier Leroy]

> Are there any plans to port ocaml to .NET?  

This has been discussed extensively on this mailing list; please
consult the archives.

- 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

RE: [Caml-list] ocaml for Mono/.NET?

[Andrew Kennedy]

Our SML.NET implementation compiles the functors of Standard ML by
expanding them at compile-time.

There *is* a tension between supporting all the features of the source
language and at the same time providing smooth inter-operation with
other .NET languages. Hopefully for functional languages this tension
will lessen when parametric polymorphism is supported by the .NET CLR. 

- Andrew.

-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Vanier [mailto:mvanier@cs.caltech.edu] 
Sent: 21 July 2002 00:27
To: bemann@execpc.com
Cc: caml-list@inria.fr
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] ocaml for Mono/.NET?


> Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2002 00:25:49 -0400
> From: Travis Bemann <bemann@execpc.com>
> 
> 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
-------------------
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