Re: [Caml-list] [ANN] Argot: 1.0 release

[Edgar Friendly <thelema314@gmail.com>]

On 11/04/2011 05:55 AM, Fabrice Le Fessant wrote:
>  The other reason is that we haven't tried Batteries or Core enough
>  yet, we have constraints, and we must make sure that if we rely on
>  the some library, the library fit these constraints. For example, I
>  know that Core has not been tested on Windows, and I don't know for
>  Batteries. Also, we want to separate between "lang" and "system",
>  i.e. modules that can be implemented with the core language, and
>  modules that have system dependencies.
>

Batteries works for me under Windows, although it's not heavily tested.  
It's pure ocaml (no C stubs), and the build system is a thin `make` 
wrapper on top of ocamlbuild.

>  Finally, unlike other companies using OCaml, we want to provide
>  support on the language itself, which means the compilers, other dev
>  tools, and also basic libraries. So, at some point, we will have to
>  contribute to either Core or Batteries, or both, but before that, we
>  need to think more about our own idea of what a good standard library
>  should be, to choose the best candidate from our point of view.

I agree there's a need for a good conversation about what a good 
standard library should be, and am interested in hearing more your point 
of view.

E.