From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4477BC32 for ; Tue, 15 Mar 2005 20:55:11 +0100 (CET) Received: from ptb-relay01.plus.net (ptb-relay01.plus.net [212.159.14.212]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id j2FJtBKO025197 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 15 Mar 2005 20:55:11 +0100 Received: from [80.229.56.224] (helo=chetara) by ptb-relay01.plus.net with esmtp (Exim) id 1DBI8E-0007f3-Ec for caml-list@yquem.inria.fr; Tue, 15 Mar 2005 19:55:10 +0000 From: Jon Harrop Organization: Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] OCaml troll on Slashdot Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 19:56:12 +0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.7.1 References: <20050315092502.GA19351@furbychan.cocan.org> <20050315.162501.15509039.debian00@tiscali.be> <8008871f05031510552ee084ab@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <8008871f05031510552ee084ab@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200503151956.13095.jon@ffconsultancy.com> X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 42373D9F.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 ocaml:01 christophe:01 troestler:01 ocaml:01 sig:01 ...:98 26,:98 frog:98 wrote:01 wrote:01 caml:02 objective:02 shootout:02 perhaps:03 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 Tuesday 15 March 2005 18:55, Christopher A. Watford wrote: > On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 16:25:01 +0100 (CET), Christophe TROESTLER > You're right, it looked something like this to me: > > Hi! I'm new to OCaml, and my first attempt and making something like I > would in C++ failed miserably. Perhaps this isn't the best forum to be saying this, but that guy's C++ code sucked as well. It could have been a lot more concise and efficient if he'd actually used C++... Maybe the task will get on the shootout and we can do it properly in OCaml. On Tuesday 15 March 2005 18:26, Kip Macy wrote: > Most people who do things well are too busy doing them to have time to > talk about them. Yes, I have to resort to putting it in my sig. ;-) -- Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. Objective CAML for Scientists http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/ocaml_for_scientists