From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <benkuin@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr
Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr
Received: from mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.82])
	by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30EA4BC57
	for <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>; Sat, 15 May 2010 02:16:01 +0200 (CEST)
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Ao0EABeF7UtKfVI0gGdsb2JhbACdfQgVAQEUJCKuKYIAhHUuiE0BAQMFhQsE
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.53,234,1272837600"; 
   d="scan'208";a="59377722"
Received: from mail-ww0-f52.google.com ([74.125.82.52])
  by mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 15 May 2010 02:16:01 +0200
Received: by wwb24 with SMTP id 24so2031073wwb.39
        for <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>; Fri, 14 May 2010 17:16:00 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to
         :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type;
        bh=WWasZoXcRSFGEgEetcOTf+ZlBMQ049cuHNPWD/Qsa/0=;
        b=xLea0xEKsL56rl/BlPspnmsNNgWm8BUQeYciZpuB5nghAsyT5P9udHz3WQntPrmt/O
         Mm5OO/KRMDVPNsuq6q6eJaKrQSIp1FmAUJnRBJ5Z4H4PqyXA0LF72Am84ZeVf51pvHdY
         c8Iq0BFSCcIdrIjmA90OW5TP9D3Uc4/x7tYSA=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :content-type;
        b=eiOJfdMptKAVbRIJEx6r+mhvTLTTSc7wHXxQ3DfNkRtWacKJ7AQvqGjDBTiwhhdA3M
         iQ2P/uAX1g3XMCFNm2nQ5uFmUAw1heO180gsVHntXVsyl4ubWx1hbmHgBoYmC6QOs/hP
         Ff5S1+WSgUBAZwcI4EX3UXMiLrkfKToXXeJ+Q=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.216.93.7 with SMTP id k7mr1304537wef.155.1273882560640; Fri, 
	14 May 2010 17:16:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.216.45.69 with HTTP; Fri, 14 May 2010 17:16:00 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <49505E67-4974-4F0B-A6B7-0E87214E92BB@gmail.com>
References: <w2t320e992a1005051158pcdb30e5w48409aa8b6e464e4@mail.gmail.com>
	 <20100512151137.26894ywcpv71ixvk@imp.ovh.net>
	 <012601caf351$e9a362e0$bcea28a0$@com>
	 <87fx1uh5r5.fsf@frosties.localdomain>
	 <AANLkTimi-r33ze7oyRr2mu29kxUUs997lnHwKTXaUBjN@mail.gmail.com>
	 <AANLkTilevqlmv-4FuDypPUX0zavErBkOd_N-7OusYxoY@mail.gmail.com>
	 <AANLkTimUajuA3nWuamWNv9v8N2-1syU3S4ltj4Gt0exj@mail.gmail.com>
	 <AANLkTik-EuZRmX8VKMdAIsO_t8JGHvS6F9TPVLkohed8@mail.gmail.com>
	 <AANLkTilfCK7lSw-aXl2vgH6WJETU-UbK4UGN8GkshcmF@mail.gmail.com>
	 <49505E67-4974-4F0B-A6B7-0E87214E92BB@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 15 May 2010 02:16:00 +0200
Message-ID: <AANLkTinTiW9XccZ6BCrlipdEWKJG4oMlPua9jaTW6NXl@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] about OcamIL
From: ben kuin <benkuin@gmail.com>
To: Vincent Aravantinos <vincent.aravantinos@gmail.com>,
	caml-list@yquem.inria.fr
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Spam: no; 0.00; ocamlopt:01 ocaml:01 caml-list:01 supported:02 talks:03 written:07 business:90 wrong:10 such:14 done:14 language:15 applications:16 impression:17 thanks:17 same:17 

> Please. You're not talking about the same thing. Ben talks about the
> benefits such a vm would have once it would be done, you talk about how hard
> it would be to do it.

Exactly, thanks.

I assume it's save to say that most today (business) critical
applications have to be written in a vm supported language. What is
with Ocamls vm then?
I have the impression that only little development is going into
Ocamls vm. Or is that wrong? If no - what is the reason for this? What
if ocamlopt would be dropped for a faster ocaml vm? Would that be an
option?