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 MAA32602; Fri, 14 Mar 2003 12:50:24 +0100 (MET) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f 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 MAA32032 for ; Fri, 14 Mar 2003 12:50:22 +0100 (MET) Received: from fichte.ai.univie.ac.at (fichte.ai.univie.ac.at [131.130.174.156]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id h2EBoLX21317 for ; Fri, 14 Mar 2003 12:50:21 +0100 (MET) Received: from fichte.ai.univie.ac.at (markus@localhost.ai.univie.ac.at [127.0.0.1]) by fichte.ai.univie.ac.at (8.12.3/8.12.3/Debian-5) with ESMTP id h2EBoEV7020519; Fri, 14 Mar 2003 12:50:14 +0100 Received: (from markus@localhost) by fichte.ai.univie.ac.at (8.12.3/8.12.3/Debian-5) id h2EBoDhI020518; Fri, 14 Mar 2003 12:50:13 +0100 Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 12:50:13 +0100 From: Markus Mottl To: Michal Moskal Cc: Oliver Bandel , caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] OCaml popularity Message-ID: <20030314115013.GB19715@fichte.ai.univie.ac.at> Mail-Followup-To: Michal Moskal , Oliver Bandel , caml-list@inria.fr References: <200303111023.LAA09578@pauillac.inria.fr> <20030311190230.13615.qmail@web10304.mail.yahoo.com> <20030312171242.GA11435@redhat.com> <20030313021517.GA29102@force.stwing.upenn.edu> <20030313095232.GC347@first.in-berlin.de> <20030313205010.GA7956@force.stwing.upenn.edu> <20030313211702.GA884@first.in-berlin.de> <20030314063349.GA16830@roke.freak> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030314063349.GA16830@roke.freak> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i Organization: Austrian Research Institute for Artificial Intelligence X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 michal:01 moskal:01 verbose:01 ocaml:01 imho:01 trivial:01 simpler:01 mottl:02 commands:97 bash:03 wrote:03 perl:03 markus:04 oefai:05 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk On Fri, 14 Mar 2003, Michal Moskal wrote: > I don't believe replacing perl scripts with ocaml ones is The Right > Thing to do... Just because in simple cases perl or sh is going to be > twice as short. OCaml mainly favors programming in large. "Short" <> "written quickly". OCaml is certainly more verbose than Perl or sh for scripting tasks, but this hardly adds to the development time. Writing down a function call instead of some funny Perl-operator only requires a second more, but makes parsing scripts much simpler for humans. Actually, though I have learnt it, I never use Perl: when I need to write some really trivial script that just executes a couple of commands, I use bash. If it's a bit less trivial, OCaml is already the better choice IMHO. Regards, Markus Mottl -- Markus Mottl markus@oefai.at Austrian Research Institute for Artificial Intelligence http://www.oefai.at/~markus ------------------- 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