Re: [Caml-list] OUD2013 part of CUFP?

[Martin Jambon <martin.jambon@ens-lyon.org>]

On Wed 03 Apr 2013 10:32:08 AM PDT, Amir Chaudhry wrote:
>
> On 3 Apr 2013, at 17:54, Gerd Stolpmann <info@gerd-stolpmann.de> wrote:
>
>> Am 03.04.2013 18:39:17 schrieb(en) Malcolm Matalka:
>>> OUD was part of CUFP last year, which is the Commercial part of ICFP. I
>>> did not attend ICFP but just CUFP, and didn't find OUD or CUFP too
>>> academic.  Did you?
>>
>> Can't tell about last year, but I visited both CUFP and OUD twice (independently), and it was ok (well, I gave talks on OUD). But this is not my point - I'm more worried about the audience the event attracts, and also about the character in total. I mean it's a difference whether you have an event of its own (even if small) or if it is part of a larger conference, where you certainly also have visitors just seeking entertainment for a bridge day.
>
> The audience that attends depends on how the event is marketed.  That includes people on this list spreading the word to other commercial users of FP, irrespective of where the event is held.  Apart from a comment about academic ritual, you haven't clarified what the problem really is.  In my view, if the events are described properly and word is spread widely, then anyone who shows up *is* the intended audience.  I personally don't know anyone (academic or otherwise) who'd spend a bridge day by going to events they're not interested in (as opposed to, say, doing some tourist stuff).

"Spreading the word widely" doesn't happen like that - it's the core of 
the problem.

In thought the goal was to raise awareness among professional software 
developers who might consider trying some more "functional" approaches 
to programming.
Pardon my cynicism, but this is different from a meeting whose goal is 
to show academics that their pet language was used by that one person 
in that big company and then pat each other on the back.


Martin