Le 31 mars 2011 à 10:19, Pierre-Alexandre Voye a écrit :

> It's funny, because I'm studying why language succeed or not, for my M1 dissertation (M1 Management), and it's one of the big factor, among others, of sucess.
> Ocaml is highly expressive, so you could turn around, but it's a big problem.
> 
> I think it would be important and interesting to create a little organization which discuss bout a standard lib and would begin making a synthesis of all these "standard" library.

Personally I'm not that unhappy with the standard lib shipped by INRIA.

maybe batteries and janestreet core (to name nowadays alternatives) have too big ambitions: extension library aside INRIA's standard lib would have more users than a complete alternative.

the way you can get haskell packaged easily, on the contrary, as some big appeal.

> 
> It would be very interesting too, to  a lot of company which could take advantage of the "0 debug" advantages of caml : This fact imply a lot of cut in software building costs which would be a great advantage for company who would offer service based on OCaml.
> 
> OCaml is now mature, it could be considered out of the laboratory, it thus become able to cross the chasm :
> http://robrozicki.files.wordpress.com/2010/02/crossing_the_chasm1.png
> 
> But making a good compiler with a minimal API isn't sufficient.
> 
> So, in summary :
> - OCaml is ready to cross the chasm, it was too early 10 years ago
> - Ocaml need a huge __standard__ API. And there a lot of work to unify about this
> - Ocaml need a standard lib package management, and some good ones exist for Ocaml