From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <daniel.buenzli@erratique.ch>
X-Original-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr
Delivered-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr
Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104])
	by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 95FA67EE80
	for <caml-list@sympa.inria.fr>; Sat, 23 Mar 2013 01:02:57 +0100 (CET)
Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  daniel.buenzli@erratique.ch) identity=pra;
  client-ip=74.55.86.74;
  receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="daniel.buenzli@erratique.ch";
  x-sender="daniel.buenzli@erratique.ch";
  x-conformance=sidf_compatible
Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  daniel.buenzli@erratique.ch) identity=mailfrom;
  client-ip=74.55.86.74;
  receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="daniel.buenzli@erratique.ch";
  x-sender="daniel.buenzli@erratique.ch";
  x-conformance=sidf_compatible
Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  postmaster@smtp.webfaction.com) identity=helo;
  client-ip=74.55.86.74;
  receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="daniel.buenzli@erratique.ch";
  x-sender="postmaster@smtp.webfaction.com";
  x-conformance=sidf_compatible
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AuEBAIvwTFFKN1ZKkWdsb2JhbABDhRWDHL0ygX8OAQEBAQkLEhQogiUBBSNWEAsaAiYCAkcQBhuIDASvaJIfgSONPDMHgi0yYQOcTxOOEQ
X-IPAS-Result: AuEBAIvwTFFKN1ZKkWdsb2JhbABDhRWDHL0ygX8OAQEBAQkLEhQogiUBBSNWEAsaAiYCAkcQBhuIDASvaJIfgSONPDMHgi0yYQOcTxOOEQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,895,1355094000"; 
   d="scan'208";a="7533175"
Received: from mail6.webfaction.com (HELO smtp.webfaction.com) ([74.55.86.74])
  by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 23 Mar 2013 01:02:56 +0100
Received: from [172.20.10.2] (81-235.197-178.cust.bluewin.ch [178.197.235.81])
	by smtp.webfaction.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFD4A20AA2B4;
	Sat, 23 Mar 2013 00:02:54 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2013 01:02:51 +0100
From: =?utf-8?Q?Daniel_B=C3=BCnzli?= <daniel.buenzli@erratique.ch>
To: Chet Murthy <murthy.chet@gmail.com>
Cc: caml-list@inria.fr, jon@ffconsultancy.com
Message-ID: <97B30B8BD4FA43F9B36C3CFBFB51221E@erratique.ch>
In-Reply-To: <54562612.dHlMTtysyv@groupon>
References: <fa.e3jKyg6bl9+vTkPgypQ4ZRzEoos@ifi.uio.no>
 <01c401ce274a$785ff1e0$691fd5a0$@ffconsultancy.com>
 <29025F595E9343479E21A54CC92048AA@erratique.ch>
 <54562612.dHlMTtysyv@groupon>
X-Mailer: sparrow 1.6.4 (build 1178)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Re: Haskell vs OCaml



Le samedi, 23 mars 2013 =C3=A0 00:47, Chet Murthy a =C3=A9crit :

> [short answer: because each time that a paying customer is affected by
> a buggy driver, the vendor of the CLR or JVM spends -serious- money
> finding and shooting that bug. They spend -serious- money building
> internal tooling to help them do this. It's expensive and
> time-consuming, and furthermore consumes -extremely-skilled- people.
> No OSS language runtime can afford that.]

I can't speak for what happens with CLR or JVM, but if you bind to OpenGL f=
rom OCaml you are basically programming with OpenGL's C interface. There's =
no direct interaction between the OpenGL drivers and OCaml's language runti=
me. So I don't think your remark makes sense in that context.=20=20

Best,

Daniel