From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from discorde.inria.fr (discorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.38]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC580BC69 for ; Thu, 2 Aug 2007 14:13:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp.syd.people.net.au (smtp.syd.people.net.au [218.214.225.98]) by discorde.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with SMTP id l72CD1dG012066 for ; Thu, 2 Aug 2007 14:13:03 +0200 Received: (qmail 11219 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2007 12:13:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hendrix.mega-nerd.net) (218.214.64.136) by smtp.syd.people.net.au with SMTP; 2 Aug 2007 12:13:16 -0000 Received: from hendrix (hendrix [192.168.200.99]) by hendrix.mega-nerd.net (Postfix) with SMTP id 78B65300F0 for ; Thu, 2 Aug 2007 22:12:58 +1000 (EST) Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2007 22:12:58 +1000 From: Erik de Castro Lopo To: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] OcaML & UML Message-Id: <20070802221258.9be9a95f.mle+ocaml@mega-nerd.com> In-Reply-To: <587515.66812.qm@web54103.mail.re2.yahoo.com> References: <587515.66812.qm@web54103.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Organization: Erik Conspiracy Secret Labs X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.3.1 (GTK+ 2.10.11; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Miltered: at discorde with ID 46B1CA4D.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail . ensmp . fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; ocaml:01 ocaml:01 mismatch:01 gcc:01 emacs:01 gdb:01 acre:98 wrote:01 caml-list:01 implemented:02 match:02 functional:02 impractical:02 erik:04 erik:04 Ed Keith wrote: > A potential client requires that the system be > documented in UML, but do not specify what language it > will be implemented in. I have used UML to document > C++ and Java, and know UML is supposed to be > implementation language independent, but am concerned > that the impedance mismatch with Ocaml may make it > impractical to combine UML and Ocaml. Any thoughts? Well since UML is designed specifically for object modelling and that the vast majority of Ocaml code I have seen and write myself is functional rather than object oriented, this looks like a match made in hell :-). Erik -- ----------------------------------------------------------------- Erik de Castro Lopo ----------------------------------------------------------------- "I'd crawl over an acre of 'Visual This++' and 'Integrated Development That' to get to gcc, Emacs, and gdb. Thank you." -- Vance Petree