From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Original-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr Received: from mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.83]) by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D21027FA30 for ; Mon, 14 Jul 2014 19:40:11 +0200 (CEST) Received-SPF: None (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of rich@annexia.org) identity=pra; client-ip=80.68.91.176; receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="rich@annexia.org"; x-sender="rich@annexia.org"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: Pass (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: domain of rich@annexia.org designates 80.68.91.176 as permitted sender) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=80.68.91.176; receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="rich@annexia.org"; x-sender="rich@annexia.org"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible; x-record-type="v=spf1" Received-SPF: None (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of postmaster@furbychan.cocan.org) identity=helo; client-ip=80.68.91.176; receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="rich@annexia.org"; x-sender="postmaster@furbychan.cocan.org"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AroNAIAVxFNQRFuw/2dsb2JhbABZgw6tRQUBAQEBAQEFAW6YaoMVAYEXFnWEBAEFOj8QCxgJExIPBSghJweIKwHIMBeFey+JIQeDLYEWBZsNlB+DRTw X-IPAS-Result: AroNAIAVxFNQRFuw/2dsb2JhbABZgw6tRQUBAQEBAQEFAW6YaoMVAYEXFnWEBAEFOj8QCxgJExIPBSghJweIKwHIMBeFey+JIQeDLYEWBZsNlB+DRTw X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.01,659,1400018400"; d="scan'208";a="85117091" Received: from furbychan.cocan.org ([80.68.91.176]) by mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA; 14 Jul 2014 19:40:11 +0200 Received: from rich by furbychan.cocan.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1X6kES-0000Jd-LE; Mon, 14 Jul 2014 18:40:08 +0100 Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2014 18:40:08 +0100 From: "Richard W.M. Jones" To: Alain Frisch Cc: Gerd Stolpmann , caml-list Message-ID: <20140714174008.GA30965@annexia.org> References: <1404501528.4384.4.camel@e130> <53BA95AC.3050602@frisch.fr> <1404822242.4384.101.camel@e130> <53BD49B1.6000203@frisch.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <53BD49B1.6000203@frisch.fr> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Immutable strings On Wed, Jul 09, 2014 at 03:54:57PM +0200, Alain Frisch wrote: > On 07/08/2014 02:24 PM, Gerd Stolpmann wrote: > >It will create confusion even with actively maintained code bases. What > >could help here is very clear communication when the change will be the > >standard behavior, and how the migration will take place. > > It's a very different kind of criticism from your initial point > about the decision of going into the current direction. Point > taken: the development team will need to communicate about the > expected timeline and migrate path. But note that 4.02 is not even > out, and since the default behavior is the previous one, there is no > hurry, and it's fine if people wait a few months before trying the > new mode. It doesn't seem crazy to wait for some early user > feedback and synchronize with them before deciding on a more precise > plan for the wider community. For instance, you feedback about > porting ocamlnet is quite useful and the current discussion shows > that several solutions compete and need further thought. Without > the new compiler switch, this discussion would not have taken place. The problem we may* have is that we have to support OCaml back to ~ 3.10 from the same code base. Rich. * I say `may' in that sentence because I've just ignored the warnings so far -- having much bigger problems with armv7hl & aarch64 support in 4.02 right now. -- Richard Jones Red Hat