RE: [Caml-list] Cross-compiling OCaml

["Brandon J. Van Every" <vanevery@indiegamedesign.com>]

John Goerzen wrote:
> Brandon J. Van Every wrote:
> >
> > I'm just objecting to the statement that Linux cross-compilation
> > support [for Windows] "would indeed be a great great additional
> > functionality."
>
> Well, let's look at that, because I believe you are missing the point.
>
> Who ever said that cross-compilation support would only
> involve running
> a compiler on x86 Linux to target x86 Windows?

Ken Rose originally said:
>
> Is there any support for cross-compilation of OCaml?  In
> particular, I'd
> like to build Windows binaries on my x86 Linux box, preferrably with
> ocamlopt.

If you want to make other points about other kinds of cross-compilation,
that's great, but it doesn't mean I'm "missing the point."  We've been
talking about the utility of cross-compilation from Linux to Windows.

> > I think the reason you should care is because Windows is a big
> > platform with a lot of users.  If you want to see the use of OCaml
>
> Why should that make us care?  Why must you persist in measuring the
> success or failure of everything on pure user count?  I would
> say that
> is a pretty damn poor way to measure success, if not a completely
> stupid one.

So you want the future of OCaml to look like the present of Lisp then?
Those who don't study history are doomed to repeat it.

> In that case, please explain the popularity of Perl, Python,
> sed, awk,
> Tcl, and Bourne shell.  All of which have had for a long time, or
> continue to have, roughly the same level of support for Windows as
> OCaml does.  Or less.

I don't agree with your characterization of OCaml's Windows support as
being "equal to" these other languages.  Python, in particular, can be
pretty seamlessly cross-platform.  At any rate, feel free to hop over to
http://wiki.cocan.org/ocaml_alliance, skip down to the "Shallower
learning-curve for Windows" section, and start enlightening us.

> I think that offering a simple tarball with the source is just fine.

I'd try to explain the importance of source control, multiple
contributors, active mailing lists, site indexing, explanatory webpages,
a user base, etc., but I did that already, so this is sounding like a
lost cause.


Cheers,                         www.indiegamedesign.com
Brand*n Van Every               S*attle, WA

Praise Be to the caml-list Bayesian filter! It blesseth
my postings, it is evil crap!  evil crap!  Bigarray!
Unboxed overhead group!  Wondering!  chant chant chant...

Is my technical content showing?

// return an array of 100 packed tuples
temps
  int $[tvar0][2*100]; // what the c function needs
  value $[tvar1]; // one int
  value $[tvar2]; // one tuple
  int $[tvar3] // loop control var
oncePre
eachPre
  $[cvar0]=&($[tvar0][0]);
eachPost
  $[lvar0] = alloc(2*100, 0 /*NB: zero-tagged block*/ );
  for(int $[tvar3]=0;$[tvar3]<100;$[tvar3]++) {
    $[tvar2] = alloc_tuple(2);
    $[tvar1] = Val_int($[cvar0][0+2*$[tvar3]]);
    Store_field($[tvar2],0,$[tvar1]);
    $[tvar1] = Val_int($[cvar0][1]);
    Store_field($[tvar2],1,$[tvar1+2*$[tvar3]]);
    Array_store($[lvar0],$[tvar3],$[tvar0]);
  }
oncePost

-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners