From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id B90B7BC8B for ; Sun, 13 Feb 2005 11:30:39 +0100 (CET) Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id j1DAUdQ6005677 for ; Sun, 13 Feb 2005 11:30:39 +0100 Received: from ix.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (popix.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.235]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id j1DAUefK008668 for ; Sun, 13 Feb 2005 11:30:40 +0100 (MET) Received: from extmail.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (extmail.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.140]) by ix.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id LAA3162270 for ; Sun, 13 Feb 2005 11:30:37 +0100 Received: (qmail 28412 invoked by uid 0); 13 Feb 2005 10:30:36 -0000 Received: from ?145.254.219.37? (HELO hobbes) (145.254.219.37) by extmail.urz.uni-heidelberg.de with SMTP; 13 Feb 2005 10:30:36 -0000 Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2005 11:26:30 +0100 From: Daniel Heck To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] The boon of static type checking Message-ID: <20050213112630.73930e19@hobbes> In-Reply-To: References: <877e9a17050206221653d14456@mail.gmail.com> <877e9a17050212145737cc30d6@mail.gmail.com> <200502131451.02231.edgin@slingshot.co.nz> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 0.9.13 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Miltered: at nez-perce with ID 420F2C4F.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 wrote:01 reuse:01 ocaml:01 ...:98 lisp:01 checking:01 seems:03 static:03 daniel:04 daniel:04 written:06 obvious:06 discussion:08 reads:08 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 (2004-11-16) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled version=3.0.2 X-Spam-Level: On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 03:12:03 +0100 (CET) Thomas Fischbacher wrote: > > An obvious example is code reuse. For certain application domains, like for > > instance, military simulation, many libraries of C++ code have been written. > > Thus, for military simulation, C++ would be a good choice for reducing time > > to market. > > Could you give a specific example, but *please* one that is not related to > killing people? Having seen you start this very discussion on another mailing list, would you *please* consider taking this question to a list that is dedicated to C++, just for a change? Frankly, your only reason for subscribing to this ML seems to be to extol the virtues of Lisp and to bash C++, which is a nuisance for everyone who reads it in the hope of learning about OCaml... Thanks, Daniel