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 QAA04952; Sat, 27 Jul 2002 16:49:36 +0200 (MET DST) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f 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 QAA04914 for ; Sat, 27 Jul 2002 16:49:35 +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 g6REnUD03171 for ; Sat, 27 Jul 2002 16:49:32 +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 g6REnLSs024334; Sun, 28 Jul 2002 00:49:21 +1000 (EST) Received: from ozemail.com.au (ppp136.dyn17.pacific.net.au [61.8.17.136]) by wisma.pacific.net.au with ESMTP id AAA09978; Sun, 28 Jul 2002 00:49:18 +1000 (EST) Message-ID: <3D42B2ED.6010806@ozemail.com.au> Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2002 00:49:17 +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: Chris Hecker CC: Issac Trotts , OCaml Mailing List Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Caml productivity. References: <4.3.2.7.2.20020726142932.02bedd60@mail.d6.com> <20020723232036.A663@execpc.com> <20020724094534.37196.qmail@web13303.mail.yahoo.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20020726142932.02bedd60@mail.d6.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20020726223019.02b1f700@mail.d6.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk Chris Hecker wrote: > > My point is that 3x is simply HUGE for a commercial programming effort. Yes. > It's easily big enough to overcome inertia and make people switch, > even if they had a year of downtime...heck, you could make up that > year in 4 months, and then the rest of your ship cycle would happen at > 3x the rate! If people could consistently get anywhere close to 3x on > most programs then everybody would switch quickly. Sorry. No. You're wrong. People use C, when C++ is unequivocably superior in almost every way. Why? [Example: Ocaml. Python. Gtk. Etc Etc. Why are all these fools using C instead of C++? Perhaps they're not fools after all?] I think you underestimate 'inertia'. It is worthwhile to consider that being conservative does have some advantages. Note also: *business productivity* is more closely related to predictable performance. Even predictable low performance of programmers is very attractive compared to risk taking. -- 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