From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Original-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104]) by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1EB317EE80 for ; Mon, 25 Mar 2013 02:22:23 +0100 (CET) Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of berenger@riken.jp) identity=pra; client-ip=134.160.33.162; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="berenger@riken.jp"; x-sender="berenger@riken.jp"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: Pass (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: domain of berenger@riken.jp designates 134.160.33.162 as permitted sender) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=134.160.33.162; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="berenger@riken.jp"; x-sender="berenger@riken.jp"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible; x-record-type="v=spf1" Received-SPF: Pass (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: domain of postmaster@postman.riken.jp designates 134.160.33.162 as permitted sender) identity=helo; client-ip=134.160.33.162; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="berenger@riken.jp"; x-sender="postmaster@postman.riken.jp"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible; x-record-type="v=spf1" X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AtAAAC2mT1GGoCGimWdsb2JhbABDhSeDHbpbgl2CEA4BAQEBARMLBxQogiQBAQQBIxVAEQsYAgIFFgsCAgkDAgECAUUTCAEBiAoGsBSRU4EjjXwWgheBEwOId41whX6OHw X-IPAS-Result: AtAAAC2mT1GGoCGimWdsb2JhbABDhSeDHbpbgl2CEA4BAQEBARMLBxQogiQBAQQBIxVAEQsYAgIFFgsCAgkDAgECAUUTCAEBiAoGsBSRU4EjjXwWgheBEwOId41whX6OHw X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,902,1355094000"; d="scan'208";a="7658767" Received: from postman2.riken.jp (HELO postman.riken.jp) ([134.160.33.162]) by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 25 Mar 2013 02:22:21 +0100 Received: from postman.riken.jp (postman2.riken.jp [127.0.0.1]) by postman.riken.jp (Postfix) with SMTP id AE7A7126053B for ; Mon, 25 Mar 2013 10:22:15 +0900 (JST) Received: from [172.27.98.103] (rikad98.riken.jp [134.160.214.98]) by postman.riken.jp (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 419C31270051 for ; Mon, 25 Mar 2013 10:22:14 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: <514FA6C6.3060204@riken.jp> Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2013 10:22:14 +0900 From: Francois Berenger User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130106 Thunderbird/17.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: caml-list@inria.fr References: <878v5lca2c.fsf@li195-236.members.linode.com> <9813208.KJBpLPkkvX@groupon> <069c01ce25ab$a9cf3f10$fd6dbd30$@ffconsultancy.com> <06b901ce25ca$cc415be0$64c413a0$@ffconsultancy.com> <514B81CB.3070103@etorok.net> <01a501ce2725$f3e530c0$dbaf9240$@ffconsultancy.com> <01ba01ce2736$e2973280$a7c59780$@ffconsultancy.com> <6C6F2DEFCC284DE9BB3ECC2A62FC8BD6@erratique.ch> <01c401ce274a$785ff1e0$691fd5a0$@ffconsultancy.com> <29025F595E9343479E21A54CC92048AA@erratique.ch> <01fb01ce2763$ec22c3f0$c4684bd0$@ffconsultancy.com> In-Reply-To: <01fb01ce2763$ec22c3f0$c4684bd0$@ffconsultancy.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-PMX-Version: 5.6.0.2009776, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.2.376379, Antispam-Data: 2013.3.25.10920 Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Re: Haskell vs OCaml On 03/23/2013 10:15 AM, Jon Harrop wrote: > Daniel Bunzli wrote: >> Unless I'm mistaken, here around when we say 100% pure OCaml code, >> it means code that uses the standard library, 100% pure OCaml modules >> and no C bindings or unsafe features like Obj. >> AFAIK labgl is not part of the OCaml system. If that software layer was >> key to your product you should have ensured that you had some >> understanding/control of it -- even if that meant writing your own. > > How do you reconcile having to reinvent the wheel by writing my own OpenGL bindings with Yaron's assertion that OCaml is "highly productive"? It's highly productive for their use case. They do mostly back-end programming in OCaml, not GUIs or websites. And it looks the same for the part of Citrix products using OCaml (back-end/system programming), cf. some ICFP papers. >> More than that you should have realized that while lablgl is fine for >> hobby opengl programming, it has obvious shortcomings that makes >> it ill suited to develop products on top of it. > > What shortcomings? > >> It seems you did something wrong in building your product... > > Only when I was building my product using OCaml. When I was building my product using F# instead I apparently didn't do anything wrong. > > Cheers, > Jon.