caml-list - the Caml user's mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Ralph Douglass" <ralph@grayskies.net>
To: "Vincent Hanquez" <tab@snarc.org>
Cc: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Re: Why OCaml sucks
Date: Fri, 9 May 2008 07:37:19 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <71767b800805090437t3893e0c0w2d966054ac4f2a95@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080509094516.GA12893@snarc.org>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3286 bytes --]

Not_found and Failure _ can be a bit annoying to watch for, so I suggest
using Core.  The default behavior for most functions is to return an option
instead of raising an exception.  There are _exn versions of the functions
if you want exceptions.

On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 5:45 AM, Vincent Hanquez <tab@snarc.org> wrote:

> On Fri, May 09, 2008 at 01:39:54AM +0100, Jon Harrop wrote:
> >
> > Brian Hurt recently published the following blog post "Why OCaml sucks":
> >
> >   http://enfranchisedmind.com/blog/2008/05/07/why-ocaml-sucks/
> >
> > I think it is interesting to discuss which aspects of OCaml can be
> improved
> > upon and how but I disagree with some of his points. I'll address each of
> the
> > original points in turn:
>
> yeah, a new troll post (!)
>
> > 1. Lack of Parallelism: Yes, this is already a complete show stopper.
>
> no it's not. it's in your fantasy world. lots of applications doesn't
> (or marginally) benefits from parallelism, and that your specific turf
> would benefit from them, is not a good reason to impose their drawbacks
> on everybody else.
>
> > 5. Strings: pushing unicode throughout a general purpose language is a
> > mistake, IMHO. This is why languages like Java and C# are so slow.
>
> unicode string should not be the default string, but unicode string need
> to be available as a first class citizen. again, ocaml is not about doing
> raytracer in opengl only.
>
> > 7. Not_found: I like this, and Exit and Invalid_argument. Brian's point
> that
> > the name of this exception does not convey its source is fallacious:
> that's
> > what exception traces are for.
>
> exception traces are *not* available in long running program (daemon).
> and having a Not_found crippling somewhere is just plain annoying.
>
> even having something like a List.Not_found/Hashtbl.Not_found would make
> thing a bit easier.
>
> > 8. Exceptions: I love OCaml's extremely fast exception handling (6x
> faster
> > than C++, 30x faster than Java and 600x faster than C#/F#!). I hate
> > the "exceptions are for exceptional circumstances" line promoted by the
> > advocates of any language implementation with cripplingly-slow exception
> > handlers.
>
> exceptions are for exceptional circumstances. using them as a fancy goto
> mechanism is just plain stupid and really bad programming style.
>
> > 9. Deforestation: Brian says "Haskell has introduced a very interesting
> and
> > (to my knowledge) unique layer of optimization, called deforrestation".
> True,
> > of course, but useless theoretical piffle because we know that Haskell is
> > slow in practice and prohibitively difficult to optimize to-boot.
> Deforesting
> > is really easy to do by hand.
>
> have you been hiding in a cave lately ?
> haskell has improve its performance lately; not on everything, but still
> can beat ocaml on some micro benchmarks.
>
> > I have other wish-list items of my own to add:
> >
> > . No 16Mb limit.
>
> use 64 bits.
>
> --
> Vincent
>
> _______________________________________________
> Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management:
> http://yquem.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/caml-list
> Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
> Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners
> Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs
>



-- 
Ralph

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4485 bytes --]

  parent reply	other threads:[~2008-05-09 11:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 89+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-05-09  0:39 Jon Harrop
2008-05-09  1:11 ` [Caml-list] " Matthew William Cox
2008-05-09  5:10   ` [Caml-list] Re: Why OCaml **cks Jon Harrop
2008-05-09  4:45 ` [Caml-list] Re: Why OCaml sucks Arthur Chan
2008-05-09  5:09   ` Jon Harrop
2008-05-09 11:12     ` [Caml-list] Re: Why OCaml rocks Gerd Stolpmann
2008-05-09 11:58       ` Gabriel Kerneis
2008-05-09 12:10         ` Concurrency [was Re: [Caml-list] Re: Why OCaml rocks] Robert Fischer
2008-05-09 12:41         ` [Caml-list] Re: Why OCaml rocks Gerd Stolpmann
2008-05-09 12:49         ` David Teller
2008-05-09 18:10       ` Jon Harrop
2008-05-09 20:40         ` Gerd Stolpmann
2008-05-09 20:55           ` Berke Durak
2008-05-10 10:56             ` Gerd Stolpmann
2008-05-09 21:00           ` Till Varoquaux
2008-05-09 21:13             ` Berke Durak
2008-05-09 22:26               ` Richard Jones
2008-05-09 23:01                 ` Berke Durak
2008-05-10  7:52                   ` Richard Jones
2008-05-10  8:24                     ` Berke Durak
2008-05-10  8:51                       ` Richard Jones
2008-05-13  3:47           ` Jon Harrop
2008-05-09 22:25         ` David Teller
2008-05-09 22:57           ` Vincent Hanquez
2008-05-10 19:59           ` Jon Harrop
2008-05-10 21:39             ` Charles Forsyth
2008-05-11  3:58               ` Jon Harrop
2008-05-11  9:41                 ` Charles Forsyth
2008-05-12 13:22             ` Richard Jones
2008-05-12 18:07               ` Jon Harrop
2008-05-12 20:05                 ` Arthur Chan
2008-05-13  0:42               ` Gerd Stolpmann
2008-05-13  1:19                 ` Jon Harrop
2008-05-13  2:03                   ` Gerd Stolpmann
2008-05-13  3:13                     ` Jon Harrop
2008-05-12 20:33             ` Arthur Chan
2008-05-12 21:22               ` Till Varoquaux
2008-05-09 13:00     ` [Caml-list] Re: Why OCaml sucks Ulf Wiger (TN/EAB)
2008-05-09 17:46       ` Jon Harrop
2008-05-09 18:17         ` Ulf Wiger (TN/EAB)
2008-05-10  1:29           ` Jon Harrop
2008-05-10 14:51             ` [Caml-list] Re: Why OCaml **cks Ulf Wiger (TN/EAB)
2008-05-10 18:19               ` Jon Harrop
2008-05-10 21:58                 ` Ulf Wiger (TN/EAB)
2008-05-10 18:39               ` Mike Lin
2008-05-12 13:31           ` [Caml-list] Re: Why OCaml sucks Kuba Ober
2008-05-12 18:18             ` Jon Harrop
2008-05-12 13:13   ` Kuba Ober
2008-05-12 19:32     ` Arthur Chan
2008-05-09  6:31 ` Tom Primožič
2008-05-09  6:46 ` Elliott Oti
2008-05-09  7:53   ` Till Varoquaux
2008-05-09  7:45 ` Richard Jones
2008-05-09  8:10   ` Jon Harrop
2008-05-09  9:31     ` Richard Jones
2008-05-09  7:58 ` [Caml-list] Re: Why OCaml rocks David Teller
2008-05-09 10:29   ` Jon Harrop
2008-05-09 13:08     ` David Teller
2008-05-09 15:38     ` Jeff Polakow
2008-05-09 18:09       ` Jon Harrop
2008-05-09 20:36         ` Berke Durak
2008-05-09 22:34         ` Richard Jones
2008-05-14 13:44           ` Kuba Ober
2008-05-09  8:29 ` constructive criticism about Ocaml Ulf Wiger (TN/EAB)
2008-05-09  9:45 ` [Caml-list] Re: Why OCaml sucks Vincent Hanquez
2008-05-09 10:23   ` [Caml-list] Re: Why OCaml **cks Jon Harrop
2008-05-09 22:01     ` Vincent Hanquez
2008-05-09 22:23       ` David Teller
2008-05-10  8:36       ` Christophe TROESTLER
2008-05-10  9:18         ` Vincent Hanquez
2008-05-09 11:37   ` Ralph Douglass [this message]
2008-05-09 13:02     ` [Caml-list] Re: Why OCaml rocks David Teller
2008-05-09 12:33 ` not all functional languages lack parallelism Ulf Wiger (TN/EAB)
2008-05-09 18:10   ` Jon Harrop
2008-05-09 20:26     ` Ulf Wiger (TN/EAB)
2008-05-12 12:54 ` [Caml-list] Re: Why OCaml sucks Kuba Ober
2008-05-12 14:16   ` Jon Harrop
2008-05-13 13:33     ` Kuba Ober
2008-05-13 13:49       ` Robert Fischer
2008-05-13 14:01         ` Brian Hurt
2008-05-13 14:13           ` Robert Fischer
2008-05-13 15:18             ` Berke Durak
2008-05-14  4:40             ` Kuba Ober
2008-05-13 14:25           ` Gerd Stolpmann
2008-05-14  4:29           ` Kuba Ober
2008-05-12 13:01 ` Kuba Ober
2008-05-12 19:18   ` Arthur Chan
2008-05-12 19:41     ` Karl Zilles
2008-05-13 13:17     ` Kuba Ober

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=71767b800805090437t3893e0c0w2d966054ac4f2a95@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=ralph@grayskies.net \
    --cc=caml-list@yquem.inria.fr \
    --cc=tab@snarc.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).