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 VAA18274; Mon, 10 May 2004 21:10:16 +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 VAA17559 for ; Mon, 10 May 2004 21:10:14 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from gatekeeper.elmer.external.excelhustler.com (gatekeeper.excelhustler.com [68.99.114.105]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i4AJABSH015734 for ; Mon, 10 May 2004 21:10:12 +0200 Received: from chatterbox.elmer.internal.excelhustler.com (unknown [192.168.0.12]) (using TLSv1 with cipher EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA (168/168 bits)) (Client CN "chatterbox.elmer.internal.excelhustler.com", Issuer "excelhustler.com" (not verified)) by gatekeeper.elmer.external.excelhustler.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DAF02E0220; Mon, 10 May 2004 14:10:10 -0500 (CDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by chatterbox.elmer.internal.excelhustler.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A59C95C006; Mon, 10 May 2004 14:10:10 -0500 (CDT) Received: from wile.internal.excelhustler.com (wile.internal.excelhustler.com [192.168.1.34]) by chatterbox.elmer.internal.excelhustler.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91B215C005; Mon, 10 May 2004 14:10:10 -0500 (CDT) Received: by wile.internal.excelhustler.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 8C4C5C05D; Mon, 10 May 2004 14:10:10 -0500 (CDT) Date: Mon, 10 May 2004 14:10:10 -0500 From: John Goerzen To: Jere Sanisalo Cc: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] OCaml to C Message-ID: <20040510191010.GA14068@excelhustler.com> References: <200405072211.12238.jdh30@cam.ac.uk> <20040508213716.GA31881@complete.org> <20040509115000.A9300@xmunkki.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040509115000.A9300@xmunkki.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1+cvs20040105i X-Scanned-By: clamscan at chatterbox.elmer.internal.excelhustler.com X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 409FD393.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Loop: caml-list@inria.fr X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 2004:99 2004:99 ocamlopt:01 runtimes:01 coders:01 usefulness:01 ocamlopt:01 c-style:01 compilers:01 ocaml:01 ocaml:01 imho:01 compile:02 native:02 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk On Sun, May 09, 2004 at 11:50:00AM +0300, Jere Sanisalo wrote: > On Sat, May 08, 2004 at 04:37:16PM -0500, John Goerzen wrote: > >However, if you are going to do that, why not just compile the code to > >native code with ocamlopt and not worry about the C piece? > > Because ocaml compilers/runtimes do not exist for every platform (say, > consoles). And because compiling to C code could allow you to write > independent libraries for others to use. It would be nice to release > libraries that do a ton of stuff, usable for C/C++ coders, that were written > easily with ocaml. And also some managers seem to trust projects that are > "pure C/C++" much more than projects that use a variable amount of > languages. IMHO, a better approach than generating C output of questionable usefulness would be to extend ocamlopt to: 1. Support those platforms it doesn't yet; 2. Support output to .o/.a/.so/.dll files to directly generate C-style shared libraries. I still don't see the utility of the massive undertaking that would be necessary to actually generate full C code from OCaml. I doubt that anyone would be able to maintain that C code directly in any meaningful way, which pretty much negates any manager-related benefit. -- John ------------------- 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