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 VAA27553; Fri, 18 Oct 2002 21:04:07 +0200 (MET DST) 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 VAA27995 for ; Fri, 18 Oct 2002 21:04:06 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from chimta01.algx.net (chimta01.algx.net [216.99.233.34]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id g9IJ45D17291 for ; Fri, 18 Oct 2002 21:04:06 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from d175.focal7.interaccess.com (d175.focal7.interaccess.com [207.208.187.175]) by chimmx01.algx.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 1.4 (built Aug 5 2002)) with SMTP id <0H460004GY60XO@chimmx01.algx.net> for caml-list@inria.fr; Fri, 18 Oct 2002 14:01:14 -0500 (CDT) Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2002 19:02:44 +0000 (GMT) From: olczyk@interaccess.com (Thaddeus L. Olczyk) Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Is Caml a fraud ( especially on Windows )? In-reply-to: <200210181323.PAA07682@pauillac.inria.fr> To: caml-list@inria.fr Cc: pragprog@yahoogroups.com, ocaml_beginners@yahoogroups.com Reply-to: olczyk@interaccess.com Message-id: <3db4511e.940732328@smtp.interaccess.com> Organization: stickit@nospammers.com MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.5/32.451 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT References: <200210181323.PAA07682@pauillac.inria.fr> Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk On Fri, 18 Oct 2002 15:23:47 +0200 (MET DST), Pierre Weis wrote: >I thaught it was clear that this was a kind of joke (given the >expressiosn "a bit special", "extremely addictive", "your last >attempt", "it ensures that the process will long for years") and a >sort of warm encouragement to keep on learning Caml, as testified by >the smiley and the last phrase. > And yet most people who make jokes like these are just hiding their arrogance behind humor. > >I would have been glad if you had understood: ``cool, he says I will >spare years by choosing at once the right language to learn'', and if >you had answered in the same humoristic manner. > Which is exactly the problem. Are you seriously saying that by learning Caml, you have learned everything there is to learn about programming? Maybe just the important stuff. ( It's clearly obvious that you don't know what the idea behind "language of the year" is. ) So are Monads and Arrows and ( what does Clean use for output? ) are not worth learning? Goo's object model is insignificant? BTW what kind of MOP does Caml use? What support does it have for AOP? >Furthermore, there is no lie in this message, it just told you the >truth: the phrase > > "Many people that learnt it seriously, just don't want to > give it up and go back to real programming with *p++ or null > pointers ..." > Or writing "advice"? This response alone shows the kind of tunnel vision I mentioned. BTW the people who I've met who hate *p++ and null pointers are people who do use VB and *think* they are programmers. They then go on to C++ and create huge messes by missusing *p++ and null pointers. They then blame thed language instead of admitting their own incompetence. > >> Often times when you see proponents say things like this, you soon >> discover the emperor has no clothes. Such statements are often made >> by people who lack diversity of experience in other programming >> languages. > >I suggest, you should not state such fact without justification: I >mean, you don't even know the emperor, nor where he lives or what he >looks like. > Maybe, maybe not. But when I see the emporer naked, I know he's naked. >Second, if I am one of the ``people who lack diversity of experience >in other programming languages'' that you mentioned, I'm just >wandering if you know some facts about me, that could let you say so ? > >To my own knowledge, I have a pretty good experience on other >programming languages, having written programs in a large number of >them and having studied for years their syntax, static and dynamic >semantics. I also have taught a lot of them to hordes of students. > Those who know do. Those who don't teach. There is a big difference between "knowing" a language snd having written code in it. Especially real world applications. >> This causes a certain sort of tunnel vision in the way they perceive >> things. Tools like debuggers are overestimated in their capabilities. >> Languages features are touted way beyond their benefit. > >I think you may have overlooked the capabilities of our debugger and >you may just ignore our language features, their orthogonality and >strength. Perhaps like Joaquin Cuenca Abela you are not familiar with the power of debuggers in other languages. As for language features, well that's the point of learning a language. For now I have to go by what others say. And from what you say I feel that I have to take the "power of OCaml" with a grain of salt. ------------------- 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