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=0.6 required=5.0 tests=NO_REAL_NAME autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0C35BC37 for ; Sat, 5 Sep 2009 12:22:41 +0200 (CEST) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Ah0CAGvYoUrUGyoFlGdsb2JhbACbOwEBAQEJCwgJEwO8VoQXBQ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.44,336,1249250400"; d="scan'208";a="33767432" Received: from smtp5-g21.free.fr ([212.27.42.5]) by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 05 Sep 2009 12:22:40 +0200 Received: from smtp5-g21.free.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp5-g21.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E775D48096 for ; Sat, 5 Sep 2009 12:22:35 +0200 (CEST) Received: from apc.happyleptic.org (happyleptic.org [82.67.194.89]) by smtp5-g21.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 355D6D4800D for ; Sat, 5 Sep 2009 12:22:33 +0200 (CEST) Received: from deb.happyleptic.org (unknown [192.168.1.20]) by apc.happyleptic.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C80B334FD for ; Sat, 5 Sep 2009 12:22:32 +0200 (CEST) Received: from rixed by deb.happyleptic.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1MjsPe-00019K-De for caml-list@yquem.inria.fr; Sat, 05 Sep 2009 12:22:30 +0200 Date: Sat, 5 Sep 2009 12:22:30 +0200 From: rixed@happyleptic.org To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Why don't you use batteries? Message-ID: <20090905102230.GB4336@deb.happyleptic.org> References: <4A9FBF04.1060608@gmail.com> <20090904105505.055ec82e@attale.agematis.loc> <4AA0DEB4.6020307@glondu.net> <7d8707de0909040326x37d455cdi9f480b2b5da96b20@mail.gmail.com> <20090904141008.GC22690@annexia.org> <3a360f590909040738g5b481822q1c25d69548233bbb@mail.gmail.com> <4AA1EEB7.9020601@gulfsat.mg> <001901ca2e0d$89f619a0$9de24ce0$@metastack.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <001901ca2e0d$89f619a0$9de24ce0$@metastack.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-Spam: no; 0.00; wikipedia:01 wiki:01 ocaml:01 ocaml:01 haskell's:01 unix:01 caml-list:01 native:03 python:03 programming:03 guess:04 problem:05 install:05 install:05 linux:07 > Using a very simple analysis from > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_desktop_operating_systems, > 97.14%[1] of the computers in the world run an OS which does not have a > "Linux"-style package manager (very sad, but true). With OCaml you can distribute native code programs, so the installation problem is relevant only to programmers. As only a very small portion of these "computers in the world" are used as programming work-stations, we can't conclude much from this measure. We'd rather have to know what share of computers used by programmers to write software does not come with a decent package system. I guess this would be much less impressive. Also, OCaml is not the only system that's harder to install on windows than on Unix : Haskell's Cabal have difficulties on windows also, for instance. I bet something like ActivePython came _after_ python was already popular and had many libraries that were easy to install on Linux only, and not the other way around. > In vain hope of not starting a flame war, In other words, you would like to be read but not answered ?