I think oasis is pretty good, just didn't have time to try it, thoroughly TBH. I think I was trying something and then I couldn't do it so I went back to my makefile (which was pretty easy to maintain). Cheers, On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 8:44 PM, Kenneth Adam Miller < kennethadammiller@gmail.com> wrote: > What's wrong with oasis and it's build system? I like that, it does a good > job if you take the time to learn it and put effort in your package details. > > The only thing I think the ocaml environment is missing is a static check > of the surrounding environment for the tools that will be used, for use in > opam. That way, when stuff builds, you get told all the dependencies > instead of doing iterations of finding each missing thing by hand. > > On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 1:38 PM, Eray Ozkural > wrote: > >> Dear Peter, >> >> On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 8:13 PM, Peter Zotov >> wrote: >> >>> On 2015-01-10 19:29, Eray Ozkural wrote: >>> >>>> Dear Ocaml list, >>>> >>>> I would be very pleased if the members who have a lasting interest in >>>> the subject of human-level AI would network with me. We have a startup >>>> working on that subject. Our code base is mainly in ocaml, and our >>>> team might need some extra programmers in the near future. Although >>>> this is not a formal job advertisement (yet), those who would like to >>>> get in touch may just send me a mail for meeting and briefly introduce >>>> themselves. I would very much welcome such personal networking and >>>> getting to know fellow functional programming hackers who are also >>>> interested in advancing the state-of-the-art in machine learning. >>>> >>> >>> Do you think that once implemented, such an AI would be able >>> to implement a decent build system for OCaml? >>> I think it would be a very worthwhile goal. >>> >> >> >> Haha! I am still using that OCaml Makefile that I got from somewhere. So I >> suppose that would mean it would have to be a better programmer than >> I am. We do fully intend to achieve that one day. Can an AI be as creative >> as a human? That was one of the popular objections that Turing evaluated >> in his 1950 paper. Theory suggests there is no reason why. Also, it is >> already >> conceivable as a (quite high tech) extension of automatic programming >> methods. If you can specify the programming problem logically, yes, a >> general-purpose AI system (universal problem solver kind) should be able >> to solve it. Can it do better than all programmers? Such solutions have >> not >> been yet demonstrated, but why not? AI could be better at chip design than >> we are, but also could be better at algorithm design. We just haven't >> done it >> at a very large scale yet. We're waiting for a Chicago Pile moment ;) >> >> Having said that, I do have an awesome makefile library that I once >> released >> called justmake. Let me extend that to include ocaml code and maybe we'll >> use that in-house. Thanks for reminding that to me. I should also upload >> a lot >> of nice bits and pieces to github for easy access. >> >> Best Regards, >> >> -- >> Eray Ozkural, PhD. Computer Scientist >> Founder, Gok Us Sibernetik Ar&Ge Ltd. >> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ai-philosophy >> > > -- Eray Ozkural, PhD. Computer Scientist Founder, Gok Us Sibernetik Ar&Ge Ltd. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ai-philosophy