From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr 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 669D4BBB7 for ; Thu, 27 Jul 2006 12:48:20 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pih-relay04.plus.net (pih-relay04.plus.net [212.159.14.131]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k6RAmJ6a022527 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Thu, 27 Jul 2006 12:48:20 +0200 Received: from [80.229.56.224] (helo=[10.0.0.5]) by pih-relay04.plus.net with esmtp (Exim) id 1G5r93-0004ra-NE for caml-list@yquem.inria.fr; Wed, 26 Jul 2006 22:42:21 +0100 From: Jon Harrop Organization: Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Re: OCaml & Microsoft? Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 22:41:57 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.1 References: <20060726081836.GA17712@ours.starynkevitch.net> <9d3ec8300607260212w7b4ee572xdbe07153fba378f3@mail.gmail.com> <1153921741.13946.28.camel@rosella.wigram> In-Reply-To: <1153921741.13946.28.camel@rosella.wigram> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200607262241.57441.jon@ffconsultancy.com> X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 44C899F3.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; ocaml:01 ocaml:01 inference:01 polymorphism:01 2006:98 2006:98 frog:98 wrote:01 wrote:01 lexical:01 closures:01 caml-list:01 caml:02 caml:02 objective:02 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.3 (2005-04-27) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled version=3.0.3 On Wednesday 26 July 2006 14:49, skaller wrote: > On Wed, 2006-07-26 at 11:12 +0200, Till Varoquaux wrote: > > Microsoft research (at least the cambridge UK branch) uses ocaml for > > some of its projects like terminator (static program analysis). > > Also, I'm guessing we will see some of the nice ocaml feature > > trickling in C# (or another mainstream caml language) one of these > > days (that's probably what F# is for). > > Some of them already have.. type inference for example, Not to mention first class lexical closures... > and a much better approach to polymorphism than Java .. > not that I'd use C# for anything Ocaml could do :) Of course not. You'd use Felix. ;-) -- Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. Objective CAML for Scientists http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/ocaml_for_scientists