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 C893ABC32 for ; Wed, 16 Mar 2005 01:35:47 +0100 (CET) Received: from pauillac.inria.fr (pauillac.inria.fr [128.93.11.35]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id j2G0Zl1w024160 for ; Wed, 16 Mar 2005 01:35:47 +0100 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 BAA29907 for ; Wed, 16 Mar 2005 01:35:47 +0100 (MET) Received: from first.in-berlin.de (dialin-145-254-052-221.arcor-ip.net [145.254.52.221]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id j2G0ZkUs024154 for ; Wed, 16 Mar 2005 01:35:46 +0100 Received: by first.in-berlin.de (Postfix, from userid 501) id 07115BBD23; Wed, 16 Mar 2005 01:35:44 +0100 (CET) Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 01:35:43 +0100 From: Oliver Bandel To: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] OCaml troll on Slashdot Message-ID: <20050316003543.GF347@first.in-berlin.de> References: <20050315092502.GA19351@furbychan.cocan.org> <20050315.162501.15509039.debian00@tiscali.be> <8008871f05031510552ee084ab@mail.gmail.com> <200503151956.13095.jon@ffconsultancy.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200503151956.13095.jon@ffconsultancy.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 42377F63.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 42377F62.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; oliver:01 bandel:01 oliver:01 in-berlin:01 caml-list:01 ocaml:01 christophe:01 troestler:01 ocaml:01 ...:98 ...:98 wrote:01 wrote:01 shootout:02 perhaps:03 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 (2004-11-16) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.1 required=5.0 tests=FORGED_RCVD_HELO autolearn=disabled version=3.0.2 X-Spam-Level: On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 07:56:12PM +0000, Jon Harrop wrote: > 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. [...] good idea. :) Ciao, oliver