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 SAA17358; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 18:19:50 +0100 (MET) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id SAA16816 for ; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 18:19:49 +0100 (MET) X-SPAM-Warning: Sending machine is listed in blackholes.five-ten-sg.com Received: from wetware.com (wetware.wetware.com [199.108.16.1]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id i0THJlP21077 for ; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 18:19:47 +0100 (MET) Received: from [208.177.152.18] (helo=[10.0.1.7]) by wetware.com with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AmFpS-0001Zs-MP for caml-list@inria.fr; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 09:19:46 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v612) In-Reply-To: <40193B59.9050700@ps.uni-sb.de> References: <20040127063230.GA12482@inv_machine> <200401282326.i0SNQntl004612@bismarck-chet.watson.ibm.com> <97908806-5238-11D8-8975-000393B8133A@wetware.com> <4018E282.2040404@dcs.qmul.ac.uk> <401930C6.8060907@dcs.qmul.ac.uk> <40193B59.9050700@ps.uni-sb.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: <54B4181A-527F-11D8-9FE3-000393B8133A@wetware.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: james woodyatt Subject: Re: [Caml-list] ocaml and concurrency Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 09:19:44 -0800 To: The Trade X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.612) X-Loop: caml-list@inria.fr X-Spam: no; 0.00; woodyatt:01 jhw:01 wetware:01 caml-list:01 rossberg:01 lacking:01 expressivity:01 closures:01 stateful:01 touted:01 monad:01 monad:01 woodyatt:01 jhw:01 wetware:01 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk On 29 Jan 2004, at 08:56, Andreas Rossberg wrote: > Martin Berger wrote: >>> Nothing? Did you forget about the possibility to code without >>> side effects? >> you have this possibility in java too, albeit less conveniently >> due to lacking type expressivity. > > And even more so due to the lack of real closures, and tail calls. You > are practically bound to stateful loops and iterators in Java and > similar languages. Not to mention the happy fact that the library of reuseable code in Java, widely touted as "extensive and rich," is heavy with side effects. Unless you want to rewrite the world to get rid of side effects, you're stuck trying to wrap imperative code in functional wrappers-- a trick not easily done without using the continuation monad. I can't even *imagine* what the continuation monad looks like in Java. Does anyone have an example? -- j h woodyatt that's my village calling... no doubt, they want their idiot back. ------------------- 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