From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <siraaj@khandkar.net>
X-Original-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr
Delivered-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr
Received: from mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.83])
	by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 800DF7EE4B
	for <caml-list@sympa.inria.fr>; Fri, 27 Sep 2013 18:25:25 +0200 (CEST)
Received-SPF: None (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  siraaj@khandkar.net) identity=pra; client-ip=128.177.27.134;
  receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="siraaj@khandkar.net";
  x-sender="siraaj@khandkar.net"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible
Received-SPF: None (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  siraaj@khandkar.net) identity=mailfrom;
  client-ip=128.177.27.134;
  receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="siraaj@khandkar.net";
  x-sender="siraaj@khandkar.net"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible
Received-SPF: None (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  postmaster@newcavia.khandkar.net) identity=helo;
  client-ip=128.177.27.134;
  receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="siraaj@khandkar.net";
  x-sender="postmaster@newcavia.khandkar.net";
  x-conformance=sidf_compatible
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgEFADmwRVKAsRuG/2dsb2JhbABbgwfBVYEcFnSCJQEBBThAARALGAkWDwkDAgECAQ82BgEMAQUCAQGHcAMPsAENiWqMZoEcgU8HhCADlhaIG4YShTSDQA
X-IPAS-Result: AgEFADmwRVKAsRuG/2dsb2JhbABbgwfBVYEcFnSCJQEBBThAARALGAkWDwkDAgECAQ82BgEMAQUCAQGHcAMPsAENiWqMZoEcgU8HhCADlhaIG4YShTSDQA
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.90,994,1371074400"; 
   d="scan'208";a="34655871"
Received: from newcavia.khandkar.net ([128.177.27.134])
  by mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 27 Sep 2013 18:25:23 +0200
Received: from [10.0.1.12] (pool-74-108-218-198.nycmny.fios.verizon.net [74.108.218.198])
	by newcavia.khandkar.net (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 7467656157;
	Fri, 27 Sep 2013 12:25:21 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <5245B16D.9090101@khandkar.net>
Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2013 12:25:17 -0400
From: Siraaj Khandkar <siraaj@khandkar.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: David MENTRE <dmentre@linux-france.org>, 
 Paolo Donadeo <p.donadeo@gmail.com>
CC: OCaml mailing list <caml-list@inria.fr>
References: <20130927091146.54ef8c42@atmarama.noip.me> <524569E1.20701@etorok.net> <CACLX4jSjSO-s0ATTUdDSpWoM=-Amzw1jVwUBSLuExY8LcCUnKg@mail.gmail.com> <CAPzAKVBkwvS6a4kNfLgZNCbkQKOyjHJkquL+d_XYE6A4+TB_sg@mail.gmail.com> <CAC3Lx=Z+peti1nEoJbh0kp2WdB_iMnvhjLfbv9mwoYBcSOeO9A@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAC3Lx=Z+peti1nEoJbh0kp2WdB_iMnvhjLfbv9mwoYBcSOeO9A@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] UFO (United Forces of OCaml)

On 09/27/2013 11:55 AM, David MENTRE wrote:
> Hello,
>
> 2013/9/27 Paolo Donadeo <p.donadeo@gmail.com>:
>> But, regarding the specific case of the
>> "extended library", there aren't many libraries, but only two:
>> Batteries and Core. And I think both of them have very strong points,
>> and the design is quite different.
>
> Is there a short document somewhere explaining those design differences?
>

I haven't seen a document comparing the goals of both directly, but 
individually each project stated differing goals:

- Batteries aims to be a compatible _extension_ of stdlib (so minimal or 
no changes required for code already using stdlib)

- Core is an incompatible _replacement_ for stdlib, aiming to take the 
greatest advantage of the type system (existing code would have to be 
updated to use Core's API)