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 LAA23157; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 11:04:23 +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 LAA23009 for ; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 11:04:22 +0100 (MET) Received: from umail.ru (umail.mtu.ru [195.34.32.101]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id i0RA4Lv22450 for ; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 11:04:21 +0100 (MET) Received: from [212.188.56.220] (HELO inv_machine) by umail.ru (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.1.8) with ESMTP id 193656536; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 12:56:17 +0300 Received: by inv_machine (Postfix, from userid 1000) id D6F2B1EA64; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 12:57:28 +0300 (MSK) Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 12:57:28 +0300 From: Alexander Epifanov To: Alexander Danilov Cc: Alexander Epifanov , caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] ocaml killer Message-ID: <20040127095728.GB16215@inv_machine> References: <20040127063230.GA12482@inv_machine> <40163240.7010101@fssg.st-oskol.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <40163240.7010101@fssg.st-oskol.ru> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i X-Loop: caml-list@inria.fr X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 skala:99 erlang:01 skala:99 wiki:01 implemented:01 cpan:01 cpan:01 terrible:01 terrible:01 bindings:01 ocaml:01 ocaml:01 alexander:01 alexander:01 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk On 12:41 Tue 27 Jan , Alexander Danilov wrote: > Alexander Epifanov wrote: > > >Hello, > > > >I have read message about Skala language, and I think (it's only my IMHO), > >that ocaml have no future without some features, like concurrent > >programming > >(CP) and chance to use libraries from the other languages. > > > >1) Erlang uses build in CP, but Skala has a library for it, IMHO it would > >be a > >good way for ocaml feature. Thread module isn't enough for effective usage > >of > >CP. > > > > > > > CP is not the main feature. For example, Perl has no good and stable CP > support, but it is very popular. > There are no so many task, that need CP. Maybe. but Thread isn't the best solution. > > >2) No one would use ocaml without libraries, and it's so hard to rewrite > >them > >all in ocaml. external functions aren't enough to use libraries from > >Languages > >like java or c++. > > > >Are any plans about these two features exists ? > > > >Thanks. > > > > > > > http://wiki.tcl.tk/critcl - here is interesting idea how to make > bindings wuickly. I think it can be implemented in Ocaml, > > The language will be preffered in many projects only when it have good > repository of packages, policy of packaging libraries, modules, etc., > simple mechanism to install this packages over the net and so on. So I > think that for more popularity Ocaml need for something like CPAN > http://www.cpan.org/ . Thats why I don't use Tcl, Ruby, Ocaml in real > applications. If Ocaml community create packaging policy and network > archive, than number of Ocaml developers will increase much faster. > Yes, I can't use _only_ Ocaml for the projects. > Not CP, not multithreading can make programmer happy :), but CPAN can. nice phrase. I agree with you. > > P.S.: I know, my English is terrible, I will try to make it better :) My English more terrible, I'm just learning it :) -- Gentoo Linux http://www.gentoo.org ------------------- 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