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 mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104]) by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5867B7EE80 for ; Sat, 23 Mar 2013 00:35:56 +0100 (CET) Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of daniel.buenzli@erratique.ch) identity=pra; client-ip=74.55.86.74; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="daniel.buenzli@erratique.ch"; x-sender="daniel.buenzli@erratique.ch"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of daniel.buenzli@erratique.ch) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=74.55.86.74; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="daniel.buenzli@erratique.ch"; x-sender="daniel.buenzli@erratique.ch"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of postmaster@smtp.webfaction.com) identity=helo; client-ip=74.55.86.74; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="daniel.buenzli@erratique.ch"; x-sender="postmaster@smtp.webfaction.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AuEBAFPqTFFKN1ZKkWdsb2JhbABDhRWDHL0ygX8OAQEBAQkLEhQogiQBAQQBI1YFCwsaAiYCAkcQIYgGBgQIr2KSIoEjjTwzBxaCFzJhA5gDhEwTjhE X-IPAS-Result: AuEBAFPqTFFKN1ZKkWdsb2JhbABDhRWDHL0ygX8OAQEBAQkLEhQogiQBAQQBI1YFCwsaAiYCAkcQIYgGBgQIr2KSIoEjjTwzBxaCFzJhA5gDhEwTjhE X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,895,1355094000"; d="scan'208";a="7532303" Received: from mail6.webfaction.com (HELO smtp.webfaction.com) ([74.55.86.74]) by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 23 Mar 2013 00:35:55 +0100 Received: from [172.20.10.2] (81-235.197-178.cust.bluewin.ch [178.197.235.81]) by smtp.webfaction.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B7C520BD20E; Fri, 22 Mar 2013 23:35:52 +0000 (UTC) Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2013 00:35:49 +0100 From: =?utf-8?Q?Daniel_B=C3=BCnzli?= To: jon@ffconsultancy.com Cc: caml-list@inria.fr Message-ID: <29025F595E9343479E21A54CC92048AA@erratique.ch> In-Reply-To: <01c401ce274a$785ff1e0$691fd5a0$@ffconsultancy.com> References: <878v5lca2c.fsf@li195-236.members.linode.com> <9813208.KJBpLPkkvX@groupon> <069c01ce25ab$a9cf3f10$fd6dbd30$@ffconsultancy.com> <06b901ce25ca$cc415be0$64c413a0$@ffconsultancy.com> <514B81CB.3070103@etorok.net> <01a501ce2725$f3e530c0$dbaf9240$@ffconsultancy.com> <01ba01ce2736$e2973280$a7c59780$@ffconsultancy.com> <6C6F2DEFCC284DE9BB3ECC2A62FC8BD6@erratique.ch> <01c401ce274a$785ff1e0$691fd5a0$@ffconsultancy.com> X-Mailer: sparrow 1.6.4 (build 1178) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Re: Haskell vs OCaml Le vendredi, 22 mars 2013 =C3=A0 23:13, Jon Harrop a =C3=A9crit : > > Since it was using OpenGL it wasn't "100% pure OCaml code". >=20=20 > How so? Unless I'm mistaken, here around when we say 100% pure OCaml code, it means= code that uses the standard library, 100% pure OCaml modules and no C bind= ings or unsafe features like Obj.=20=20 But maybe you are new around here... > Why do you assume that I wrote my own OpenGL bindings? I used the pre-exi= sting LablGL bindings that were not only the defacto-standard for OCaml+Ope= nGL at the time (i.e. OCaml's most widely tested OpenGL bindings) but had b= een written by Jacques Garrigue, one of the authors of OCaml itself. AFAIK labgl is not part of the OCaml system. If that software layer was key= to your product you should have ensured that you had some understanding/co= ntrol of it -- even if that meant writing your own. More than that you shou= ld have realized that while lablgl is fine for hobby opengl programming, it= has obvious shortcomings that makes it ill suited to develop products on t= op of it. > Why do "buggy drivers" affect 80% of our users when we write our software= in 100% OCaml and 0% of our customers when we write our software in 100% F= #? You know it's called hypotheses, I don't know what you did, we will never k= now since you are never able to provide any details. I'm aware that's the w= ay you like to discuss, by boasting unverifiable claims, but it became very= boring after all these years.=20=20 It seems you did something wrong in building your product, don't blame the = system because you are making the wrong choices (it seems a pattern with yo= u btw [1]). There's more than one OCaml industrial user out there, if the O= Caml system had random segfaults, I'm pretty sure we would be aware of it. Anyway, believe me I'm very glad you are successful in programming in F#, k= eep going. Best, Daniel [1] http://caml.inria.fr/pub/ml-archives/caml-list/2009/06/7f2abbd136332881= dff65ab4fa0fd673.en.html