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 JAA21994; Wed, 26 Mar 2003 09:54:42 +0100 (MET) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id JAA02017 for ; Wed, 26 Mar 2003 09:54:41 +0100 (MET) Received: from athlon.baretta.com ([213.255.109.130]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id h2Q8seX05277 for ; Wed, 26 Mar 2003 09:54:40 +0100 (MET) Received: from baretta.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by athlon.baretta.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BCCE273BB; Wed, 26 Mar 2003 10:00:04 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <3E816C13.7040507@baretta.com> Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 10:00:03 +0100 From: Alessandro Baretta Organization: Baretta srl -- www.baretta.com User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.1) Gecko/20020826 X-Accept-Language: it, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Sven Luther , Ocaml Subject: Re: [Caml-list] camlimages vs. labltk References: <3E81640C.40009@baretta.com> <20030326083345.GA2985@iliana> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam: no; 0.00; alessandro:01 baretta:01 caml-list:01 camlimages:01 labltk:01 sven:01 luther:01 -pack:01 wisely:99 namespaces:01 riders:01 cmo:01 ocaml:01 caml:01 alex:01 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk Sven Luther wrote: > On Wed, Mar 26, 2003 at 09:25:48AM +0100, Alessandro Baretta wrote: > > > There is already the -pack option, and the right thing to solve this > problem would be to build all libraries to make usage of it (if > possible). So you would have a CamlImage.Image module and a Labltk.Image > module, which work pretty well. > > Now, library writters just need to modify their build system to take > advantage of it, starting by the INRIA released libraries, especially > the ones provided by the ocaml tarball directly like labltk. Sven, someone on this list wisely pointed out that you buy nothing by telling someone else "You don't need that feature". We do need namespaces. It might not be paramount: I'm pretty sure there is something more important to be done at Inria. But, please, don't tell me that -pack will cure cancer, promote democracy, establish universal peace, and make my teeth look whiter. Packing does not allow factorizing your code--bytecode, actually--in small reusable units. One big .cmo is not as flexible as a .cma. I simply might not want to link all of a library: what if it's modules contain side-effects? So -pack is good, but namespaces are still a necessary feature to Ocaml as to any industrial level programming language. Cheers to all Caml riders, Alex ------------------- 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