From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id IAA32104; Thu, 20 Jun 2002 08:52:07 +0200 (MET DST) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: (from weis@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id IAA32295 for caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr; Thu, 20 Jun 2002 08:52:06 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id SAA21846 for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2002 18:23:06 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from sunny.pacific.net.au (sunny.pacific.net.au [203.25.148.40]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id g5JGN4j14018 for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2002 18:23:05 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from wisma.pacific.net.au (wisma.pacific.net.au [210.23.129.72]) by sunny.pacific.net.au with ESMTP id g5JGMvZr009941; Thu, 20 Jun 2002 02:22:57 +1000 (EST) Received: from ozemail.com.au (ppp4.dyn17.pacific.net.au [61.8.17.4]) by wisma.pacific.net.au with ESMTP id CAA14114; Thu, 20 Jun 2002 02:22:54 +1000 (EST) Message-ID: <3D10AFDD.5050908@ozemail.com.au> Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2002 02:22:53 +1000 From: John Max Skaller User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.2.1) Gecko/20010901 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alessandro Baretta CC: Ocaml Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Unix.file_descr -> int ??? References: <3D0F37E6.6000307@baretta.com> <000101c21705$d9f23640$0501a8c0@lexifi01> <3D0FB722.6000009@baretta.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk Alessandro Baretta wrote: > How can customers not realize that improvements in the production > technology necessarily translate to reduced costs and improved quality? They don't realise it, because it isn't the case. They're right, in general -- meaning, most of the time. Ocaml is high risk. It is unstable, there are few programmers around, and you can't sue the Ocaml team if something doesn't work. You can't *demand* a fix by saying 'I paid heaps of money for this product, you better fix it or I'll sue'. Of course, the reality is that Ocaml team is more likely to be responsive. But as a counter-example, I found a bug months ago that was only recently fixed: I couldn't force the ocaml team to believe me that there really was a bug in the compiler. I didn't have an expensive maintenance contract either. So I have had to use Ocaml 3.01 for ages now. (I'm using the CVS version now the bug is fixed). I'm currently working on a project using Python. The 'boss' is a programmer. We're opting for 1.5.2, a well recognized, widely installed, stable version. Yet Python 2.2.1 has major improvements, including lexical scoping (Heh! functional programming in Python). Why? Because when it comes to small productivity improvement (maybe) against risk, management -- even technically aware management -- will chose to minimise risk every time. It makes sense. They just need the programs to make their business run. A small increase in costs is less important than risking a catastrophy. To see what it takes to overcome this kind of barrier, just look at how much money Sun has spent to promote Java. (Oh dear, what a terrible setback for computing). BTW: I used Ocaml in a heavy industrial setting .. but it was for writing a compiler -- something Ocaml is so very good at. In this case, the timeframe for, say, a C++ solution would have meant they missed the boat entirely. So sometimes, superior technology does win -- when the risk seems justified or low. -- John Max Skaller, mailto:skaller@ozemail.com.au snail:10/1 Toxteth Rd, Glebe, NSW 2037, Australia. voice:61-2-9660-0850 ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners