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 TAA13324; Thu, 15 Apr 2004 19:39:49 +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 TAA13327 for ; Thu, 15 Apr 2004 19:39:48 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from calmail-cl.berkeley.edu (mailfarm.Berkeley.EDU [128.32.61.106]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i3FHdlYM009347 for ; Thu, 15 Apr 2004 19:39:47 +0200 Received: from [64.162.212.212] (HELO tallman.kefka.frap.net) by calmail-cl.berkeley.edu (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.1.8) with SMTP id 17141162; Thu, 15 Apr 2004 10:39:46 -0700 Received: by tallman.kefka.frap.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Thu, 15 Apr 2004 10:38:53 -0700 Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2004 10:38:53 -0700 From: Kenneth Knowles To: skaller Cc: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Re: GODI vs. Ocamake Message-ID: <20040415173853.GA6463@tallman.kefka.frap.net> References: <005e01c421f5$2dd45210$ef01a8c0@warp> <1081943666.20677.685.camel@pelican> <20040414164957.GA24089@tallman.kefka.frap.net> <1081991111.20677.877.camel@pelican> <20040415063426.GA24925@tallman.kefka.frap.net> <1082014418.20677.1125.camel@pelican> <20040415160011.GA6233@tallman.kefka.frap.net> <1082049025.20677.1250.camel@pelican> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1082049025.20677.1250.camel@pelican> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i X-Miltered: at concorde by Joe's j-chkmail ("http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr")! X-Loop: caml-list@inria.fr X-Spam: no; 0.00; knowles:99 caml-list:01 ocamake:01 2004:99 2004:99 00,:99 knowles:99 autoconf:01 autoconf:01 ranting:01 meets:99 rant:01 productive:01 anyhow:01 off-topic:01 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk On Fri, Apr 16, 2004 at 03:10:26AM +1000, skaller wrote: > On Fri, 2004-04-16 at 02:00, Kenneth Knowles wrote: > > > > > > [script] > > > > Do you see how you are doing the same work as autoconf, but in a language other > > than m4/shell? > > It's the whole POINT of presenting it! > > you can write the tools you need and integrate them in a > SINGLE unified language. And remove the depenencies > on things like Make and Autoconf .. which don't really > work anyhow. > > [Say no to autoconf] Ranting against autoconf is off-topic and uninteresting. I'm not talking about autoconf, I'm talking about the paradigm of even having a "configure" phase to the build. I support it, and *don't* think it is a good idea to create your own from scratch each time. Thus, ocamlconf, a support library for writing configure scripts in O'Caml. By the way, "Make" works perfectly; it is a domain-specific programming language with a clear specification that it meets. It just doesn't do what you want it to, so let's drop that rant as well, and try to be a bit more productive. Kenn ------------------- 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