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 PAA14068; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 15:48:20 +0200 (MET DST) 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 PAA14162 for ; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 15:48:19 +0200 (MET DST) X-SPAM-Warning: Sending machine is listed in blackholes.five-ten-sg.com Received: from gatekeeper.elmer.external.excelhustler.com (gatekeeper.excelhustler.com [68.99.114.105]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id i7VDmHQ3024112 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=FAIL) for ; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 15:48:18 +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 D9B3D56128; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 08:48:16 -0500 (CDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by chatterbox.elmer.internal.excelhustler.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8D9056127; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 08:48:16 -0500 (CDT) Received: from chatterbox.elmer.internal.excelhustler.com ([192.168.0.12]) by localhost (chatterbox [192.168.0.12]) (amavisd-new, port 10025) with ESMTP id 01493-07; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 08:48:14 -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 274AE56126; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 08:48:14 -0500 (CDT) Received: by wile.internal.excelhustler.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 1EAB53D07E; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 08:48:14 -0500 (CDT) From: John Goerzen To: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Cross-compiling OCaml Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 08:48:13 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.7 Cc: "Brandon J. Van Every" References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200408310848.13932.jgoerzen@complete.org> X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-20030616-p7 (Debian) at excelhustler.com X-Miltered: at nez-perce with ID 413481A1.000 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 brandon:99 lablgtk:01 ahh:01 camlp:01 runtime:01 foo:01 foo:01 language':01 biological:99 model:01 invention:99 python:01 ocaml:01 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk On Tuesday 31 August 2004 04:05 am, Brandon J. Van Every wrote: > > What for ? It is boring, the tools are subadequat, and any > > try to compile a > > nice ocaml/lablgtk app for windows too resulted in no more > > than a major time lose. > > I already explained why I'm stuck with Windows. > > But to offer a different philosophical take: Linux is boring too. > *Programming* is boring. I only care about the artistic results, the > games I could make via programming. I'm interested in tools that Ahh, that is not why I am here. I am here because programming is fun and exciting. I am here because I like to try new or different things. I like to open my mind to ideas I haven't heard before, to concepts that are new to me. OCaml has more of that than any other language I've learned in a long time, even though I do have experience with functional, imperative, and OO languages. I am still trying to consider all the possibilities that camlp4 opens up, and that's just one aspect of it. The native code compilation means that, with a shell on an ARM machine, I can compile OCaml code to run on my Zaurus without the need for a large runtime environment. The bytecode compilation means that I can take this stuff I compiled on Linux and run it on AIX. > make it all less painful. Emphasis on *less* painful. There's still > plenty of pain to be had from OCaml, same as any current programming > language. Nobody has written the UberLanguage yet. I'm not even sure Yes, there is pain everywhere. I've never been one to shy away from the "all foo sucks, but foo x sucks less" [1]. But if you hate programming, then stop doing it. Find something you enjoy. > the paradigm of 'written computer language' is what we need. I think > we need voice driven programming and a biological model of software > grafting. In other words, computers need to work like we do. I'd much rather use a keyboard to tell the computer what to do than have to listen to the conversations of everyone else with their computers. Besides, written communication has been around for a very long time, too. It predates the invention of the digital computer by, oh, several millennia. I think it's quite false to complain that using written communication is somehow forcing humans to work like computers. > So, to me that's a problem to be solved. Then SOLVE IT ALREADY. -- John Goerzen Author, Foundations of Python Network Programming http://www.complete.org/pynet ------------------- 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