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=AWL autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 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 830A4BC6B for ; Sat, 4 Aug 2007 18:21:50 +0200 (CEST) Received: from furbychan.cocan.org (furbychan.cocan.org [80.68.91.176]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id l74GLnNX004969 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO) for ; Sat, 4 Aug 2007 18:21:50 +0200 Received: from rich by furbychan.cocan.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1IHMNj-0001xF-00; Sat, 04 Aug 2007 17:21:35 +0100 Date: Sat, 4 Aug 2007 17:21:35 +0100 To: skaller Cc: Brian Hurt , tmp123@menta.net, ocaml ml Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Sorted list Message-ID: <20070804162135.GA7370@furbychan.cocan.org> References: <46B4485B.7040406@menta.net> <46B454ED.700@philippewang.info> <1186226538.14440.105.camel@rosella.wigram> <46B48F3C.1040904@menta.net> <1186242141.11801.10.camel@rosella.wigram> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1186242141.11801.10.camel@rosella.wigram> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i From: Richard Jones X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 46B4A79D.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail . ensmp . fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; ocaml:01 ocaml:01 lgpl:01 wrote:01 wrote:01 maintainers:01 caml-list:01 data:02 algorithms:03 library:03 distributed:05 brian:05 licence:05 implement:06 inria:06 On Sun, Aug 05, 2007 at 01:42:21AM +1000, skaller wrote: > On Sat, 2007-08-04 at 11:09 -0400, Brian Hurt wrote: > > > Unortunately, the standard Ocaml solution in a situation like this is to > > implement your own data structure. The good news is that this is easy. > > The bad news is that, because this is easy, there is little pressure on > > the maintainers of Ocaml to add features to the core library. > > Well, I would like to see a community process for selecting, > implementing, documenting and maintaining a set of good algorithms > which go IN THE STANDARD DISTRIBUTION (under the usual LGPL+X licence, > with a disclaimer the code base isn't maintained by Inria, merely > distributed on behalf of the community). But what's wrong with extlib? Now I know it's not the "Standard" distribution, but that's a mere packaging issue. Rich. -- Richard Jones Red Hat