You should check with someone who knows better, but I suspect that if you
become a member of the OCaml consortium (which is fairly cheap) you would
have the rights to do what you propose.

y

On 4/12/07, Jon Harrop <jon@ffconsultancy.com> wrote:
>
> On Thursday 12 April 2007 16:53, Harrison, John R wrote:
> > | A new version of Poly ML also doesn't have the persistent storage
> >
> > system.
> >
> > Thanks; I didn't know that, and it comes as quite a surprise given
> > Poly's history.
> >
> > Still, my question about OCaml stands. More specifically, I want to
> > know whether the facility to save and restore state doesn't exist
> > because
> >
> >  * None of the main OCaml developers particularly care about it
> >
> > or
> >
> >  * There are non-trivial technical problems implementing it.
>
> Like Michael, I am also not going to answer your question (sorry!) but can
> I
> just say that, as a commercial developer, there would be significant
> incentive to write a killer IDE for OCaml if the current top-level was
> free
> for commercial use, e.g. part of the stdlib.
>
> Having been playing with F# recently, I'm starting to appreciate some of
> the
> features afforded by a decent IDE. However, both OCaml and F# lack
> features
> found in the other and, more importantly, lack many features that could be
> hugely beneficial, particularly to users of the interactive systems.
>
> Marshalling top-level state is one such feature.
>
> --
> Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
> OCaml for Scientists
> http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/ocaml_for_scientists
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>