From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: 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 197CA7EE51 for ; Fri, 24 May 2013 17:00:04 +0200 (CEST) Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of esther.baruk@gmail.com) identity=pra; client-ip=209.85.217.174; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="esther.baruk@gmail.com"; x-sender="esther.baruk@gmail.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: Pass (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: domain of esther.baruk@gmail.com designates 209.85.217.174 as permitted sender) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=209.85.217.174; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="esther.baruk@gmail.com"; x-sender="esther.baruk@gmail.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible; x-record-type="v=spf1" Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of postmaster@mail-lb0-f174.google.com) identity=helo; client-ip=209.85.217.174; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="esther.baruk@gmail.com"; x-sender="postmaster@mail-lb0-f174.google.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Am8CAMh/n1HRVdmum2dsb2JhbABZgziwAolniDx9CBYOAQEBAQEGCwsJFCiCIwEBAwEBQAEbDwMLAQMBCwYFCw0NCBkiAREBBQEKEgYTCAoCh2YBAwkGDJxzjD+CfYRtChknAwpYiAwBBQyPDQQHCoNKA5c7gSmOMhYphDc6 X-IPAS-Result: Am8CAMh/n1HRVdmum2dsb2JhbABZgziwAolniDx9CBYOAQEBAQEGCwsJFCiCIwEBAwEBQAEbDwMLAQMBCwYFCw0NCBkiAREBBQEKEgYTCAoCh2YBAwkGDJxzjD+CfYRtChknAwpYiAwBBQyPDQQHCoNKA5c7gSmOMhYphDc6 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.87,736,1363129200"; d="scan'208";a="15598848" Received: from mail-lb0-f174.google.com ([209.85.217.174]) by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-SHA; 24 May 2013 17:00:02 +0200 Received: by mail-lb0-f174.google.com with SMTP id u10so4794709lbi.33 for ; Fri, 24 May 2013 08:00:02 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=w2bI6eT39gvRyOMnmsNzCMVsPyOasIrUQymyNZB+9qM=; b=kTD9Tf/tsmH1rKmqUYcF9GQFK79MkB6mMImNR2xtpAtXYh6ir1YecKqx3DOpIX0yyH 1lE0HfBNIMhpYWPyKQASdeEAiu9Gg7FS58IfrBc5nHttI/URGxi3uCnFhWr9BtSbVCfG IVUF4oL4kkp/apce2Y3MXDPJ7VPZ4ZT7xdYUd9IwqUSZ2SPLfcRXLmS7zqIp/fgFAXVf WGAEmXXAfFnN/h7WuQCp/Uz/DkyBqKYdw9tYo5ixiA3Bw5jYZ0dFJGUd4uumvlWJJHo0 Bg/YIInh3685JjcjhKNfCEz+u6jRrpphKiybnCI2eLnqztbVkwq2uwrTHhPnac/+Dnvv MNpA== X-Received: by 10.152.1.6 with SMTP id 6mr9086734lai.14.1369407602040; Fri, 24 May 2013 08:00:02 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.112.79.170 with HTTP; Fri, 24 May 2013 07:59:41 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20130524143500.GE2007@siouxsie> References: <519F1CF6.7050007@riken.jp> <20130524143500.GE2007@siouxsie> From: Esther Baruk Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 16:59:41 +0200 Message-ID: To: oliver Cc: "caml-list@inria.fr users" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e013c6706ac26c004dd780dbf Subject: Re: [Caml-list] French study on security and functional languages --089e013c6706ac26c004dd780dbf Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello, I'll just translate for you one of the recommandations of the document "Mod=E8les d'ex=E9cution d'OCaml" on page 15 : "Recommandation R-2 : prefer camlp4 as a preprocessor" I didn't read the whole document but reading this simple sentence makes me conclude that this LaFoSec project was done without taking into account all the community "movement" that is going on right now. From my point of view, you cannot analyse a language, or the tools that come with it, without taking informations from experts and from the community around this language. These documents do not even mention the -ppx option and thus the project was done without comparing the two approaches... However, I think these documents are good to give more visibility to OCaml and maybe convince people that are still reluctant to functional languages. Cheers, Esther Baruk On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 4:35 PM, oliver wrote: > On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 04:55:34PM +0900, Francois Berenger wrote: > > On 05/24/2013 04:02 PM, David MENTRE wrote: > > >Hello, > > > > > >For those reading French, ANSSI (French agency for information > > >security) published a study on security and functional languages, with > > >a set of recommendations. OCaml is apparently well studied: > > > > http://www.ssi.gouv.fr/fr/anssi/publications/publications-scientifiques/a= utres-publications/lafosec-securite-et-langages-fonctionnels.html > > > > The document "=C9tat des lieux des langages fonctionnels" > > is interesting even out of the context of computer security. > > > > > http://www.ssi.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/LaFoSec_-_Etat_des_lieux_des_langages_fonc= tionnels.pdf > > > > PS: and, most importantly, page 55 gives good marks to OCaml > > compared to other languages (so that we can start to troll now) :-) > > > Hahah :-) > > I would be happy to have an english version of this study... > my language skills are very delimited and french is not > in the small bag of languages I know. > > Possibly the crucial pages can be translated by some people? > > Ciao, > Oliver > > -- > Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management and archives: > https://sympa.inria.fr/sympa/arc/caml-list > Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners > Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs > --089e013c6706ac26c004dd780dbf Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hello,

I'll just translate for you = one of the recommandations of the document "Mod=E8les d'ex=E9cutio= n d'OCaml" on page 15 :=A0
"Recommandation R-2 : pr= efer camlp4 as a preprocessor"
I didn't read the whole document but reading this simple sentence = makes me conclude that this LaFoSec project was done without taking into ac= count all the community "movement" that is going on right now.
From my point of view, you cannot analyse a language, or the tools tha= t come with it, without taking informations from experts and from the commu= nity around this language.
These documents do not even mention th= e -ppx option and thus the project was done without comparing the two appro= aches...
However, I think these documents are good to give more visibility to O= Caml and maybe convince people that are still reluctant to functional langu= ages.

Cheers,

Esther Baruk


On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 4:35 PM, oliver = <oliver@first.in-berlin.de> wrote:
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 04:55:34PM +0900, Francois Berenger wrote:
> On 05/24/2013 04:02 PM, David MENTRE wrote:
> >Hello,
> >
> >For those reading French, ANSSI (French agency for information
> >security) published a study on security and functional languages, = with
> >a set of recommendations. OCaml is apparently well studied:
> > =A0 http://www.ssi.gouv.fr/fr/anssi/publicatio= ns/publications-scientifiques/autres-publications/lafosec-securite-et-langa= ges-fonctionnels.html
>
> The document "=C9tat des lieux des langages fonctionnels"
> is interesting even out of the context of computer security.
>
> http://www.ssi.gouv.fr/IMG/pd= f/LaFoSec_-_Etat_des_lieux_des_langages_fonctionnels.pdf
>
> PS: and, most importantly, page 55 gives good marks to OCaml
> =A0 =A0 compared to other languages (so that we can start to troll now= ) :-)


Hahah :-)

I would be happy to have an english version of this study...
my language skills are very delimited and french is not
in the small bag of languages I know.

Possibly the crucial pages can be translated by some people?

Ciao,
=A0 =A0Oliver

--
Caml-list mailing list. =A0Subscription management and archives:
ht= tps://sympa.inria.fr/sympa/arc/caml-list
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs

--089e013c6706ac26c004dd780dbf--