RE: [Caml-list] Cross-compiling OCaml

RE: [Caml-list] Cross-compiling OCaml

[Brandon J. Van Every]

james woodyatt wrote:
> Brandon J. Van Every wrote:
> > The Caml Trade wrote:
> >
> > Ok, I suppose you're confident in the longevity of OCaml
> > then.  I think
> > market mindshare has to be fought for, if one wants to continue to
> > enjoy good contracts.
>
> You're trying to recruit the wrong people to join the fight.

Yes, actually, I've realized that mailing lists such as this are filled
with early adopters who are nevertheless 100% satisfied with their
personal situation.  It's not everybody, but it's always somebody.  If I
talk about improvement, they're always vocal about how satisfied they
are.  I encountered a similar phenom on comp.lang.python and this
confirms the archetype.  My main purpose is to have a presence and
provide a channel for people who are *NOT* satisfied.  In other words, I
seek recruits for ocaml-biz, COCAN, and ocamlgames.

> > My stereotype of a UNIX guy is someone who likes to play with text
> > editors all day long.
>
> Thank you for sharing your stereotype.

You're welcome.  There's a lot of truth in stereotypes.  One of the
reasons I gave up on Seattle's local Python user groups, is I'd keep
going to meetings, and they'd talk about all sorts of text processing
scripting database stuff.  Never about 3D graphics, AI, or games.  I
conclude that there's this entire world of text processual data that a
lot of people are into, that they think is really really kewl, but that
I've just never been involved in.  I suppose text has a compelling
tractability, it seems to fit the UNIX scripter hacker meme.  Contrast
this to Windows which doesn't even have a decent OS shell by default.
Instead one has abundant GUI eye candy.  Between the UNIX and Windows
world, there is clearly a split between textual and graphical
orientation.  It's not an exclusive split, I did say it was a
stereotype, but in terms of dominant trends it's quite true.

OCaml's UNIX-centric community doesn't strike me as an exception to this
rule.  My plans are mainly about graphics technologies I need to build,
not graphics technologies that are readily available.  OCaml is mainly
proven in the realm of language transformation.  So, is its
UNIX-oriented community an accident?  I think not.

> I'm sure it must be helpful to vent.

'Twas a stereotype, not a vent.

> Your project on the caml-list is clearly to harp on Unix
> developers to
> switch to developing for Windows until they can't bear to
> listen to it anymore

You sure make a big deal out of out of 1 initial statement that was
framed with the caveat, "I know you Linux / mingw guys aren't into
this."  I was just being honest about what native Windows developers
actually consider useful.  If one thinks one's solving some kind of
Windows deployment goal, well, cross-compilation from Linux ain't it.
It's an avoidance goal, not a deployment goal.

> and either 1) killfile your entire mail domain, or 2)
> switch to
> developing for Windows just to make you happy.
>
> Guess which one I'm thinking is more likely to happen.

I think that's your point of view, not my project.  Discussions of what
may or may not be my projects are best left to ocamlgames and ocaml-biz.


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

Re: [Caml-list] Cross-compiling OCaml

[John Goerzen]

On Wednesday 01 September 2004 01:37 pm, Brandon J. Van Every wrote:
> james woodyatt wrote:
> > Brandon J. Van Every wrote:
> > > The Caml Trade wrote:
> > >
> > > Ok, I suppose you're confident in the longevity of OCaml
> > > then.  I think
> > > market mindshare has to be fought for, if one wants to continue
> > > to enjoy good contracts.
> >
> > You're trying to recruit the wrong people to join the fight.
>
> Yes, actually, I've realized that mailing lists such as this are
> filled with early adopters who are nevertheless 100% satisfied with
> their personal situation.  It's not everybody, but it's always
> somebody.  If I talk about improvement, they're always vocal about
               ^^^

I think that is an important point.

I have been a member of the Python community for a long time, and have 
seen that people are most definitely NOT shy about talking about things 
that need improvement.  In fact, there is a formal process for major 
improvements to the language: PEP [1].

Perhaps there is something about the criticisms (err, "improvements") 
that you are making.  Perhaps you are trying to solve problems that 
nobody else perceives.  Perhaps your "fix" for things would really make 
things worse.  Perhaps you lack the experience in any language, 
community, or business to make intelligent suggestions.

> how satisfied they are.  I encountered a similar phenom on

You also encountered it on freeciv-dev.

> comp.lang.python and this confirms the archetype.  My main purpose is
> to have a presence and provide a channel for people who are *NOT*
> satisfied.  In other words, I seek recruits for ocaml-biz, COCAN, and
> ocamlgames.

Frankly, through all your talk on all these forums, I have never yet 
seen even one single substantive thing come out of it.  I think you are 
all talk and no do.  In other words, a troll.

> > > My stereotype of a UNIX guy is someone who likes to play with
> > > text editors all day long.
> >
> > Thank you for sharing your stereotype.
>
> You're welcome.  There's a lot of truth in stereotypes.  One of the
> reasons I gave up on Seattle's local Python user groups, is I'd keep
> going to meetings, and they'd talk about all sorts of text processing
> scripting database stuff.  Never about 3D graphics, AI, or games.  I
> conclude that there's this entire world of text processual data that
> a lot of people are into, that they think is really really kewl, but
> that I've just never been involved in.  I suppose text has a

Actually, there are a lot more people doing that than 3D, AI, or games.

But that's like complaining about going to a Perl meeting and hearing 
about parsing or going to an Emacs meeting and hearing about Lisp.

3D stuff is not a Python strength.  If you're doing 3D, you are probably 
not using Python.  Why would they be talking about it then?

Here in the OCaml community, there is a lot of talk about math in all 
sorts of shapes.  There's little talk about threading (something I find 
very useful in Python) or text processing, though people *are* working 
on these things.

> compelling tractability, it seems to fit the UNIX scripter hacker
> meme.  Contrast this to Windows which doesn't even have a decent OS
> shell by default. Instead one has abundant GUI eye candy.  Between
> the UNIX and Windows world, there is clearly a split between textual

This is silly.  The fact that Windows ships a poor CLI by default 
doesn't mean that Unix is less graphically-oriented.  Almost every 
Linux distribution, plus Solaris and AIX, ship with a graphical mode 
enabled by default.  Most hide the CLI in almost the same way Windows 
does.  MacOS X goes even farther.  (Are you still forgetting that MacOS 
X is a Unix?)

> I think that's your point of view, not my project.  Discussions of
> what may or may not be my projects are best left to ocamlgames and
> ocaml-biz.

Or /dev/null, preferably.  Since the set of your projects is pretty much 
the same as the contents of that file.

[1] http://www.python.org/peps/

-------------------
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

RE: [Caml-list] Cross-compiling OCaml

[Brandon J. Van Every]

John Goerzen wrote:
> > Brandon Van Every wrote:
> >
> > how satisfied they are.  I encountered a similar phenom on
>
> You also encountered it on freeciv-dev.

Goodness, the C crowd.  If OCaml people were to consider the codebase
and my reactions to it, do you want to take bets on where their
sympathies would lie?  Let's just say my offers to Pythonize stuff met
with crickets chirping.  I did make a VS 2003 build that apparently
nobody but myself actually wanted because they're too UNIX / mingw
oriented.  Did the same thing for XConq, got the same reactions.
Freeciv and XConq were the painful mingw projects I referred to when
this thread started.  Well, and all their support libraries too.  Well,
kicking zlib into VS 2003 buildable shape wasn't so hard, but it was
futzy.  Like ripping off a <dirent.h> implementation and that sort of
thing.  I'm sooooo uninterested in mingw now.

It feels like I've been at "heavy duty e-mail" for a week.  Checking
dates, it's only been 3 days for this thread, but that's way more than
enough.  Even I have my limits, amazingly enough.  As of this post, I'm
bowing out of this thread.

I made the point I wanted to make in my 1st post.  Linux-to-Windows
cross-compilation is a Windows avoidance strategy, not a Windows support
strategy.  As such, Linux guys may want it, but Windows guys don't.
We'd like VS 2003 support, or nothing, thanks much.  Makefiles with MSVC
as the backend are ok, just please don't assume a Cygwin / mingw build
and header file environment.

I'll be looking at cross-platform build tools, but that's like OCaml
project priority #5 right now.  It seems there are several competing
OCaml build tools out there  For instance, ocalibs has its own tool
called ocalibsmake.  Plus non-OCaml build tools to consider.  A lot of
tools to chug through.  I don't have time right now.

Oh, and if you're wondering where to get the free MSVC compiler sans
Visual Studio IDE, it's at:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/visualc/vctoolkit2003/  So don't say Microsoft
never gave ya nuthin'.  :-) They're reeeel generous, they just love you
all over.

> But that's like complaining about going to a Perl meeting and hearing
> about parsing or going to an Emacs meeting and hearing about Lisp.

Indeed, part of why I dropped Python is there's nothing worthwhile in
that community for 3D graphics.  I did a lot of looking and digging.
Nothing is past the "Hey, we've got an OpenGL wrapper!" stage.  Well,
neither is OCaml, but OCaml has performance and Python doesn't.

> Frankly, through all your talk on all these forums, I have never yet
> seen even one single substantive thing come out of it.  I
> think you are all talk and no do.  In other words, a troll.
>
> [...]
>
> Or /dev/null, preferably.  Since the set of your projects is
> pretty much the same as the contents of that file.

You're welcome to come over to ocamlgames, ocaml-biz, or the COCAN wiki
at any time.  I haven't seen you at any of those venues, so perhaps
you're just prone to the Law Of Selective Observation.  If you have
serious work to discuss, we can do so.


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

"Troll" - (n.) Anything you don't like.
Usage: "He's just a troll."

-------------------
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

Re: [Caml-list] Cross-compiling OCaml

[Jon Harrop]

On Wednesday 01 September 2004 09:08, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:
> Jon Harrop <jon@jdh30.plus.com> wrote:
> > I am under the impression that French Copyright laws make this difficult.
> > IIRC, there was a post by Xavier long ago...
>
> Anybody have a pointer to this?

http://caml.inria.fr/archives/200403/msg00171.html

Essentially, the libraries we use are intended for use by the compiler and not 
by us (hence Hashtbl's semantics). OCaml programmers are advised to write 
third-party libraries and not to try to get stuff adopted into the core OCaml 
distribution.

Cheers,
Jon.

-------------------
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

Re: [Caml-list] Cross-compiling OCaml

[I R T]

"Brandon J. Van Every" <vanevery@indiegamedesign.com> writes:

> Ok, I suppose you're confident in the longevity of OCaml then. 

Functional programming has been around longer than Microsoft
and will still be here after MS is a distant memory.

> And what is 'my project' ?  It certainly isn't a Linux-to-Windows OCaml
> cross-compiler.

Ocean Mars ?
Whatever happened to that game you were developing that you used to routinely
bother the freeciv and xconq lists about ?

-------------------
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

Re: [Caml-list] Cross-compiling OCaml

[Richard Jones]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1200 bytes --]

On Wed, Sep 01, 2004 at 06:08:20PM +1000, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:
> I'm really comparing the situation with Python. If I write some
> Python code, I KNOW that there are about 100 modules (including
> some pretty esoteric stuff see http://docs.python.org/modindex.html)
> that are GUARANTEED to be available at any destination which has
> Python included.
> 
> The guaranteed availablity of huge variety of modules is something
> I really miss in O'Caml, and thats on top of the fact that even
> the standard modules have missing components like I pointed out
> in the my earlier email in this thread.

Point taken.  That's why whenever I install OCaml or instruct someone
else how to install OCaml, I always get them to install ocaml + extlib
+ pcre.  It's a good "standard base" for development.

Rich.

-- 
Richard Jones. http://www.annexia.org/ http://www.j-london.com/
Merjis Ltd. http://www.merjis.com/ - improving website return on investment
'There is a joke about American engineers and French engineers. The
American team brings a prototype to the French team. The French team's
response is: "Well, it works fine in practice; but how will it hold up
in theory?"'

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [Caml-list] Cross-compiling OCaml

[Sven Luther]

On Wed, Sep 01, 2004 at 10:17:55AM -0700, Brandon J. Van Every wrote:
> Brandon J. Van Every wrote:
> > The Caml Trade wrote:
> >
> > > I think you have your priorities crossed.  Lots of good
> > > code migrates
> > > out of the Unix culture into the Windows development world, but it
> > > historically *never* happens when Unix-centric people push?
> > > only when Windows-centric people pull.
> >
> > Mono
> > concept of installation packages
> > most commercial digital media editing software
> > most games
> >
> > My stereotype of a UNIX guy is someone who likes to play with text
> > editors all day long.
> 
> I suppose I missed that you were talking about *code* migration, as
> opposed to who's the progenitor of what technology on what platform.
> The phenomenon you describe of "which whay the code flows" is largely
> true.  After all, Windows people can and do buy commercial apps that get

The vaste majority just use pirated versions though.

Friendly,

Sven Luther

-------------------
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

Re: [Caml-list] Cross-compiling OCaml

[I R T]

"Brandon J. Van Every" <vanevery@indiegamedesign.com> writes:

> Geez, it's, like, sooooo much more effective to assist someone else
> who's ALREADY DEVELOPING OCaml game stuff on Windows

Enlighten us, what games have you written ?


-------------------
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

Re: [Caml-list] Cross-compiling OCaml

[John Goerzen]

On Wednesday 01 September 2004 11:38 am, Brandon J. Van Every wrote:
> > I think you have your priorities crossed.  Lots of good code
> > migrates out of the Unix culture into the Windows development
> > world, but it historically *never* happens when Unix-centric people
> > push— only when Windows-centric people pull.
>
> Mono

I'd say few Windows people have any need for that.

> concept of installation packages

Yes, that concept was present in Unix systems prior to Windows, but 
again, I don't think there's any code that went to the Windows side.

> most commercial digital media editing software

Are you forgetting that MacOS X is a Unix platform?

> most games

I still don't see how this code moves frmo Unix.

> My stereotype of a UNIX guy is someone who likes to play with text
> editors all day long.

Obviously you have not visited sgi.com or freedesktop.org then.

-------------------
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

RE: [Caml-list] Cross-compiling OCaml

[Brandon J. Van Every]

Brandon J. Van Every wrote:
> The Caml Trade wrote:
>
> > I think you have your priorities crossed.  Lots of good
> > code migrates
> > out of the Unix culture into the Windows development world, but it
> > historically *never* happens when Unix-centric people push—
> > only when Windows-centric people pull.
>
> Mono
> concept of installation packages
> most commercial digital media editing software
> most games
>
> My stereotype of a UNIX guy is someone who likes to play with text
> editors all day long.

I suppose I missed that you were talking about *code* migration, as
opposed to who's the progenitor of what technology on what platform.
The phenomenon you describe of "which whay the code flows" is largely
true.  After all, Windows people can and do buy commercial apps that get
their jobs done.  A lot of invention of capability happens on Windows,
in proprietary commercial software.  Then UNIX guys clone it, if they
can tear themselves away from their text editors.  Leaving open source
vs. proprietary aside, there are arenas in which UNIX developers are
mostly responsible for the innovations, and arenas where Windows
developers are.  Which OS one gravitates towards is largely a matter of
problem domain.  I think it would be silly to look to UNIX for game or
3D graphics code.


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

RE: [Caml-list] Cross-compiling OCaml

[Brandon J. Van Every]

The Caml Trade wrote:
>
> Well, I don't care about Windows and its users.  I don't have
> to care.
> I have a day job that pays the rent, and neither the Windows platform
> nor its users are a significant part of my personal lifestyle
> management strategy.

Ok, I suppose you're confident in the longevity of OCaml then.  I think
market mindshare has to be fought for, if one wants to continue to enjoy
good contracts.

> I think you have your priorities crossed.  Lots of good code migrates
> out of the Unix culture into the Windows development world, but it
> historically *never* happens when Unix-centric people push— only when
> Windows-centric people pull.

Mono
concept of installation packages
most commercial digital media editing software
most games

My stereotype of a UNIX guy is someone who likes to play with text
editors all day long.

> > Should I fault you for the public administration of your project?
> > I'll choose not to, if you choose not to blame 'Windows
> > whiners' for your project status.
>
> Arggh.  I'm not blaming "Windows whiners" for the status of *my*
> project.  I'm blaming them for the status of *YOUR* project.

And what is 'my project' ?  It certainly isn't a Linux-to-Windows OCaml
cross-compiler.


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

Re: [Caml-list] Cross-compiling OCaml

[I R T]

"Brandon J. Van Every" <vanevery@indiegamedesign.com> writes:


>
> But to offer a different philosophical take: Linux is boring too.
> *Programming* is boring.  I only care about the artistic results, the
> games I could make via programming. 


All this from someone who says that he has not yet written a line of
Ocaml....

-------------------
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

Re: [Caml-list] Cross-compiling OCaml

[Erik de Castro Lopo]

On 01 Sep 2004 14:05:55 +1000
skaller <skaller@users.sourceforge.net> wrote:

> On Wed, 2004-09-01 at 01:54, John Goerzen wrote:
> 
> > The feeling I got from some at INRIA, though, was that they are not 
> > really interested in expanding the standard library too much for 
> > various reasons.
> 
> Sure -- they'd have to maintain it :)
> 
> Ocaml is getting known. My local "Sydney Linux Users Group"
> apparently had someone give a talk on Ocaml. 

Heh, that was me [0] :-). The talk went swimmingly well and I 
had a couple of people express real interest in it.

Erik

[0] Don't let the .com email address fool you, I live in Potts
    Point.
-- 
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
  Erik de Castro Lopo  nospam@mega-nerd.com (Yes it's valid)
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
"Software is largely a service industry operating under the persistent
but unfounded delusion that it is a manufacturing industry."
-- Eric S. Raymond
-- 
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
  Erik de Castro Lopo  nospam@mega-nerd.com (Yes it's valid)
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
Reporter: "What do you think of Western Civilisation?"
M.K. Gandhi: "I think it would be a good idea."

-------------------
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

Re: [Caml-list] Cross-compiling OCaml

[Erik de Castro Lopo]

On Tue, 31 Aug 2004 23:49:35 +0100
Jon Harrop <jon@jdh30.plus.com> wrote:

> I am under the impression that French Copyright laws make this difficult. 
> IIRC, there was a post by Xavier long ago...

Anybody have a pointer to this?

> Would it be a good idea to have a replacement instead of a supplement? 

I'm really comparing the situation with Python. If I write some
Python code, I KNOW that there are about 100 modules (including
some pretty esoteric stuff see http://docs.python.org/modindex.html)
that are GUARANTEED to be available at any destination which has
Python included.

The guaranteed availablity of huge variety of modules is something
I really miss in O'Caml, and thats on top of the fact that even
the standard modules have missing components like I pointed out
in the my earlier email in this thread.

Cheers,
Erik
-- 
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
  Erik de Castro Lopo  nospam@mega-nerd.com (Yes it's valid)
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
"The X-files is too optimistic. The truth is not out there."
-- Anthony Ord

-------------------
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

Re: [Caml-list] Cross-compiling OCaml

[Sven Luther]

On Tue, Aug 31, 2004 at 08:05:41PM -0400, Christopher A. Watford wrote:
> Reply within,
> 
> >>>SNIP>>>
> > Who ever said that cross-compilation support would only involve running
> > a compiler on x86 Linux to target x86 Windows?  It could involve
> > running a compiler on x86 Linux to target arm Zaurus, or m68k Linux, or
> > x86 FreeBSD, or amd64 Linux.  Or running a compiler on PowerPC NetBSD
> > to target Alpha NetBSD.  Or whatever else.
> 
> I think this point needs to be streesed. Like John is trying to say,
> people are asking for CROSS-ARCHITECHTURE compiling, not CROSS-API.
> You can't expect to just plop down code and expect the API to be
> supported by your machine/compiler, however, you should be able to
> retarget the compiler for any architecture that may support it.

No, cross compiling to window is nice, and it should work.

The main point is that the code generation part should be made to build for a
different arch/os than the one the compiler is built on, which is not possible
right now, well at least not easily possible without mangling the built system
a lot.

Xavier and the rest of the ocaml team, would you consider such a feature for
3.09 ? 

Friendly,

Sven Luther

-------------------
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

Re: [Caml-list] Cross-compiling OCaml

[Erik de Castro Lopo]

On Tue, 31 Aug 2004 10:54:19 -0500
John Goerzen <jgoerzen@complete.org> wrote:

> Both should be fairly easy to accomplish, actually.  If you send me a 
> patch, I'd be happy to add it to MissingLib :-)

Well the idea of getting it in the standard lib is that it gets
installed as part of every standard install. That cannot be said
of MissingLib.

Erik
-- 
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
  Erik de Castro Lopo  nospam@mega-nerd.com (Yes it's valid)
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
"The day Microsoft makes something that doesn't suck is probably the
day they start making vacuum cleaners." -- Ernst Jan Plugge

-------------------
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

Re: [Caml-list] Cross-compiling OCaml

[james woodyatt]

[this will be my last message on this subject to the caml-list]

On 31 Aug 2004, at 02:05, Brandon J. Van Every wrote:
> james woodyatt wrote:
>>
>> [people like me] who couldn't give a rat's patootie whether the 
>> existing level of support for Windows improves any time soon.
>
> I think the reason you should care is because Windows is a big 
> platform with a lot of users.

Well, I don't care about Windows and its users.  I don't have to care.  
I have a day job that pays the rent, and neither the Windows platform 
nor its users are a significant part of my personal lifestyle 
management strategy.

And if I were to care about big platforms with lots of users that 
currently don't have Objective Caml support, the biggest ones on the 
list would be Embedded Linux and VxWorks, not Windows.  And that would 
mean— wait for it— cross-compiling Ocaml.  (Why look, that's the 
subject line in this thread!)

> If you want to see the use of OCaml grow, so that there's more OCaml 
> stuff available for all of us, and more paying OCaml jobs, then growth 
> on the Windows platform is important.

I think you have your priorities crossed.  Lots of good code migrates 
out of the Unix culture into the Windows development world, but it 
historically *never* happens when Unix-centric people push— only when 
Windows-centric people pull.

Remember the ancient hippie proverb: "Ass, gas or grass; nobody rides 
for free."  If you want to see growth on the Windows platform (or any 
other platform), then you need to start paying for it— either in euros 
or in time spent coding on it.

> Your conclusion doesn't fit the available data.  The available data is 
> your project has hardly gotten off the ground.  You have a recruitment 
> problem.  You haven't solved it, because you haven't established basic 
> infrastructure for such recruitment.

Ah, I see where we have gone awry.  Since I don't have a payroll, I'm 
in no position to recruit.  Since it will be a long time before I have 
anything to sell, I am expending very little effort on marketing.  I do 
not need or want any help developing my library.  I do not need or want 
a Windows port of my library, and if I did, I would code it myself.

I am merely including in my announcements (four of them, so far— five 
counting this one) a note that I don't have support for Windows, and 
that I would need assistance porting it.  If you want a Windows port, 
you will have to make it yourself— but I would be happy to coordinate 
the integration of appropriate patches into future releases.  Waiting 
for me to do it on my own will be a *long* wait.

>> Meanwhile, not a week goes by on this list without some 
>> Windows-centric guy complaining about the vacuum of Windows support 
>> for Ocaml.  I'm starting to believe the problem is that 
>> Windows-centric guys are lazy bums who whine too much about what 
>> other people choose to do with their time when they should be 
>> spending their own time coding on things that are important to them.
>
> Should I fault you for the public administration of your project?  
> I'll choose not to, if you choose not to blame 'Windows whiners' for 
> your project status.

Arggh.  I'm not blaming "Windows whiners" for the status of *my* 
project.  I'm blaming them for the status of *YOUR* project.

My project is moving along just fine (pretty close to a major release 
of a whole raft of useful new components) on the [very] limited 
publicity and non-existent Windows support it currently enjoys, thank 
you.  Your project appears to be suffering setbacks with every message 
you post to the list.

(Here is the real motivation for me to post this off-topic drivel— I 
think your project may not get the attention it deserves unless you 
adopt a more *productive* strategy.  And besides that, I happen to 
think an OCaml cross-compiler, and/or a cross-compiled bytecode 
interpreter, would be a fantastic contribution to the community.  I 
hope someone picks up that ball and runs with it.)


-- 
j h woodyatt <jhw@wetware.com>
markets are only free to the people who own them.
-------------------
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

Re: [Caml-list] Cross-compiling OCaml

[skaller]

On Wed, 2004-09-01 at 01:54, John Goerzen wrote:

> The feeling I got from some at INRIA, though, was that they are not 
> really interested in expanding the standard library too much for 
> various reasons.

Sure -- they'd have to maintain it :)

Ocaml is getting known. My local "Sydney Linux Users Group"
apparently had someone give a talk on Ocaml. So there are
at least 3 Ocaml programmers in the land of Oz now :)

-- 
John Skaller, mailto:skaller@users.sf.net
voice: 061-2-9660-0850, 
snail: PO BOX 401 Glebe NSW 2037 Australia
Checkout the Felix programming language http://felix.sf.net



-------------------
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

Re: [Caml-list] Cross-compiling OCaml

[Christopher A. Watford]

Reply within,

>>>SNIP>>>
> Who ever said that cross-compilation support would only involve running
> a compiler on x86 Linux to target x86 Windows?  It could involve
> running a compiler on x86 Linux to target arm Zaurus, or m68k Linux, or
> x86 FreeBSD, or amd64 Linux.  Or running a compiler on PowerPC NetBSD
> to target Alpha NetBSD.  Or whatever else.

I think this point needs to be streesed. Like John is trying to say,
people are asking for CROSS-ARCHITECHTURE compiling, not CROSS-API.
You can't expect to just plop down code and expect the API to be
supported by your machine/compiler, however, you should be able to
retarget the compiler for any architecture that may support it.

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

Its more out of respect for the operating system to include the source
as a zip file for windows users. Just as you might include an rpm for
Red Hat or an ebuild for Gentoo. I would agree that a .tgz file
'should' be the lowest common denominator, but hey, you can't always
get what you want.

> Oh please, tell us what is so wrong with posting the source code easily
> accessible as a tarball.  Is it that Windows people can't figure out
> how to use Winzip?

Nah its 'cause they don't need to have winzip installed anymore. XP/2k
have compressed folder support built in, sort of takes away the need
for WinZip. Though John is right, if you're releasing the source to an
OCaml Library, that implies your users should be damn well smart
enough to open a tarball.

> John Goerzen
> Author, Foundations of Python Network Programming
> http://www.complete.org/pynet

I think this thread has gone horribly offtopic with gripes more about
CROSS-API support rather than CROSS-ARCHITECTURE. Hell, because of the
raw differences in API between Linux and Win32, I think it would be
harder to target Win32 from Linux. But, since Win32 tends to have like
90%-ish support for POSIX/stdlibc/etc, I think it would be easier to
have the Win32 compiler target Linux images.

However, like any good programmer, you must take into account
programming in a cross platform/architecture manner (in C I tend to
use ifdef's, yeah ugly but whatever) in order to even have a glimpse
of a hope with getting it to work across the 3 major regions (win32,
*nix/un*x/bsd, osx; I'm leaving out OpenVMS etc...).

-- 
Christopher A. Watford
christopher.watford@gmail.com
http://dorm.tunkeymicket.com

-------------------
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

Re: [Caml-list] Cross-compiling OCaml

[Benjamin Geer]

Jon Harrop wrote:
> I would certainly be interested in contributing to either INRIA's core or an 
> alternative.

Why not contribute to ExtLib?

http://ocaml-lib.sourceforge.net

Ben

-------------------
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

Re: [Caml-list] Cross-compiling OCaml

[Jon Harrop]

On Tuesday 31 August 2004 16:54, John Goerzen wrote:
> ...
> The feeling I got from some at INRIA, though, was that they are not
> really interested in expanding the standard library too much for
> various reasons.

I am under the impression that French Copyright laws make this difficult. 
IIRC, there was a post by Xavier long ago...

Would it be a good idea to have a replacement instead of a supplement? Indeed, 
is this unfeasible because of name clashes with the core library, i.e. would 
you need to provide the functionality of the core library and compile 
ocamlopt against it?

I would certainly be interested in contributing to either INRIA's core or an 
alternative. I'd want to encapsulate things properly though - no good having 
lots of erratically named modules for the same thing, e.g. List, Listutils, 
MyList, MyOtherList, and having to remember which function is where.

My list of unambiguous missing functions currently stands at:

- List.mapi and List.rev_mapi
- Chop a list into two sublists at a given index
- List.sub (equivalent to Array.sub)
- Array.map2, fold_left2, fold_right2, mem, for_all and for_all2
- Random.array (or something) to randomise the order of the elements of an 
array

I think Jacques wrote an OO library which was intended to be used as the basis 
for derived work, such as this. I'm not sure what the implications of using 
objects rather than modules are though (e.g. performance). Maybe I should 
give it a go...

Cheers,
Jon.

-------------------
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

RE: [Caml-list] Cross-compiling OCaml

[Brandon J. Van Every]

Martin Jambon wrote:
>
> Imagine Brandon is a girl. Do you think
> honestly it is a proper way to talk to her?

In the politically correct defense of girls, there are a few in heavy
duty computerdom, and I've sparred with at least one capable defender on
the Nebula2 mailing list.  I do not mind or regret that my comments
result in friction.  It is an artifact of my personal style, a choice I
make.  I do mind when a debate becomes abusive, or when the engineering
implications aren't honest, just heavily prioritized.  I don't recall
being guilty of abuse.  I do recall letting my biases run away with me
sometimes, as happens to most of us at least some of the time.

The Myers-Briggs Type Indicators say a lot about what kinds of
communication people do or don't tolerate.  http://humanmetrics.com  It
was invented by a woman in the 1940's who had no formal degree but was a
fan of Jungian archetypes.  She wanted a job placement test, something
that would determine what kind of work people were psychologically
suitable for.  It still has tremendous utility today, and says much
about interpersonal communication as well.  Common schisms that happen
in all technical communities I've participated in:

Introvert vs. Extrovert - is popularity of a product important?

Thinker vs. Feeler - what kind of debate transpires before it becomes
abusive?
                     who perceives what as abusive?

Perceiver vs. Judger - when has someone "had enough" with someone else?

Mercifully, techies and academics in general are usually iNtuitives, not
Sensors.  So we only get to have 3 of the 4 possible schisms.  :-)  On
the other hand, 3/4 of people are Extrovert, and it's way easier for
Extroverts to get along with other Extroverts than for Introverts to get
along with other Introverts.  So others are similarly advantaged.
Communities tend to have 3 of the 4 possible schisms, as they are
generally self-selective on one of the axes.


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

RE: [Caml-list] Cross-compiling OCaml

[Brandon J. Van Every]

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

RE: [Caml-list] Cross-compiling OCaml

[Brandon J. Van Every]

John Goerzen wrote:
>
> Why should I pay so much for the privilege of developing on a
> platform I hate?

It depends on what job you're trying to get done.

> I am tired of you complaining about this or that feature that nobody
> wants, demanding people write it because the gaming marketplace wants
> it,

This is revisionist.  I said Windows native developers *DO NOT* want
Linux cross-compilation, so I'm hoping someone will spare themselves the
trouble of writing such a thing.  Or at least recognize that they're
doing it for Linux developers, not Windows developers.  My wish for more
Windows support from that crowd is just that, wishful.  I said up front
that I realize Linux / Mingw developers aren't into Windows and don't
care.  I just want people to be honest about what they care about and
what practical good it is to anybody.

> and doing nothing at all to address it.  This is not the
> only place you've been doing that.

More nonsense.  What do you think
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocamlgames/ is for?  What do you think
we've been discussing lately?  If you don't have patience for the level
of output, too bad.  Go start your own game project that solves all the
deployment and mindshare problems.

> I seriously doubt that anybody here wants to work with Windows.  So
> unless you come up with some cash or code, shut up already.

Fortunately, I have no ability to take you seriously on this point.  To
do so would be to admit that OCaml can *NEVER* achieve a good market
position, compared to Java, C#, or even Python.

> OK then.  How about porting whatever it is in OCaml that
> doesn't work on
> Windows?  Go ahead.  I'm sure if you do a good job of it, people will
> be happy to take your patches.

Geez, it's, like, sooooo much more effective to assist someone else
who's ALREADY DEVELOPING OCaml game stuff on Windows.  Are you going to
keep spouting off, or are you going to check out the ocamlgames list
sometime?  Are you into solutions or histrionics?


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

RE: [Caml-list] Cross-compiling OCaml

[brogoff]

On Mon, 30 Aug 2004, Brandon J. Van Every wrote:
> Sven Luther wrote:
> >
> > This would indeed be a great great additional functionality.
>
> Well, speaking as a Windows-centric guy, I'd rather people just put
> their time into good Windows support.  I realize that the Linux / mingw
> crowd isn't so inclined towards that.  I'm just saying that mainstream
> Windows developers don't see cross-compilation from Linux as valuable.
> First class native Windows support is what counts.

I think that you might be happier using Clean than OCaml. The Clean team has
inverted priorities (with regards to OSes they support) from the OCaml team.
For them, Windows support and then Mac support are first, and Unix is a second
class citizen. There are even some (very primitive) game libraries for Clean.

I think it's a good thing for OCaml that Unix support comes first, for many
reasons, not the least important of which is that the Unix community does tend
to have more of a programmer oriented, "can do" mindset, IMO. I concur with
everything John Goerzen wrote about programming being (potentially) fun, and
cross compilation as meaning more than Windows (ARM is very interesting to me
lately) as a target. But priorities can differ, and I think with your stated
priorities you may be happier there.


-- Brian






-- Brian

-------------------
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

Re: [Caml-list] Cross-compiling OCaml

[Sven Luther]

On Wed, Sep 01, 2004 at 01:17:24AM +1000, skaller wrote:
> On Tue, 2004-08-31 at 19:18, Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 31, 2004 at 02:05:58AM -0700, Brandon J. Van Every wrote:
> > > Sven Luther wrote:
> 
> > > I already explained why I'm stuck with Windows.
> > 
> > Only because you chose to, nobody is ever stuck with windows.
> 
> With due respect Sven, Brandon explained why he really IS stuck
> with Windows. You might have missed it but -- he wants to
> develop commercial games.

Sure, but he chose to do some on Windows. He could have done the same on linux
or some other Oses, like Mac OS X for example, it would even have been less
crowded there, but he chose not to.

Also, i believe that a small Linux Live DVD, with the needed drivers and the
whole game on it would be a rather good devel plateform.

Friendly,

Sven Luther

-------------------
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

Re: [Caml-list] Cross-compiling OCaml

[Ken Rose]

John Goerzen wrote:
> On Tuesday 31 August 2004 04:05 am, Brandon J. Van Every wrote:
> 
>>james woodyatt wrote:
>>
>>>I'd rather that the Windows-centric guys on the list put their time
>>>into good Windows support for Ocaml,
>>
>>No problem.  As I said, I realize Linux / mingw guys aren't into
>>this.
>>
>>I'm just objecting to the statement that Linux cross-compilation
>>support "would indeed be a great great additional functionality."  As
> 
> 
> 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?  It could involve 
> running a compiler on x86 Linux to target arm Zaurus, or m68k Linux, or 
> x86 FreeBSD, or amd64 Linux.  Or running a compiler on PowerPC NetBSD 
> to target Alpha NetBSD.  Or whatever else.

Just to clarify things, that is what I really would like to see.  One of 
the great things about GCC is that I can set it up to run on nearly any 
adequate host, and generate code for any supported target.  It would be 
really handy to be able to do that with OCaml, too.

And yes, that means compiling windows programs on Linux, like for my 
current DSL compiler project, or compiling Palm apps on Windows, or even 
Windows games on Windows, should I ever want to wade back into that sewer.

  - ken


-------------------
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

Re: [Caml-list] Cross-compiling OCaml

[John Goerzen]

On Tuesday 31 August 2004 09:06 am, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Aug 2004 08:29:27 -0500
>
> John Goerzen <jgoerzen@complete.org> wrote:
> > Now, I have complained here on several occasions about the size of
> > the standard OCaml library compared to that of, say, Python.  But
> > I'm doing something about it.  (http://quux.org/devel/missinglib)
>
> John,
>
> Is there a push to get some of that stuff pushed into the
> standard library?

Not AFAIK.  However, I'd be willing to give any code in MissingLib to 
INRIA and let them use it under the OCaml copyright for the purposes of 
putting it into the standard library.  MissingLib is designed to "play 
nicely" with the standard library.  As an example, Extlib uses their 
Enum type to handle a lot of things.  MissingLib uses a standard 
Stream.  Less featureful but more compatible with different things.  So 
it should be easy to integrate if anyone is interested.

The feeling I got from some at INRIA, though, was that they are not 
really interested in expanding the standard library too much for 
various reasons.

> I keep on finding things that I want to do again and again,
> which should be in the standard library but which seem to
> be missing. A couple of examples I have found are:
>
>   - a function to find the intersection of two lists
>   - a function to remove duplicate entries in a list

Both should be fairly easy to accomplish, actually.  If you send me a 
patch, I'd be happy to add it to MissingLib :-)

-- 
John Goerzen
Author, Foundations of Python Network Programming
http://www.complete.org/pynet

-------------------
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

Re: [Caml-list] Cross-compiling OCaml

[skaller]

On Wed, 2004-09-01 at 00:06, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:

> In the spirit of John's post, is there any thing I can do
> to help push functionality into the standard library?

Extlib project:

http://ocaml-lib.sf.net

-- 
John Skaller, mailto:skaller@users.sf.net
voice: 061-2-9660-0850, 
snail: PO BOX 401 Glebe NSW 2037 Australia
Checkout the Felix programming language http://felix.sf.net



-------------------
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

Re: [Caml-list] Cross-compiling OCaml

[skaller]

On Tue, 2004-08-31 at 19:18, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 31, 2004 at 02:05:58AM -0700, Brandon J. Van Every wrote:
> > Sven Luther wrote:

> > I already explained why I'm stuck with Windows.
> 
> Only because you chose to, nobody is ever stuck with windows.

With due respect Sven, Brandon explained why he really IS stuck
with Windows. You might have missed it but -- he wants to
develop commercial games.

Actually there are other platforms (Xbox, Gameboy, etc),
but Linux isn't yet a serious commercial game platform.
Perhaps OSX might become a reasonable alternative to Windows.

-- 
John Skaller, mailto:skaller@users.sf.net
voice: 061-2-9660-0850, 
snail: PO BOX 401 Glebe NSW 2037 Australia
Checkout the Felix programming language http://felix.sf.net



-------------------
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

Re: [Caml-list] Cross-compiling OCaml

[Erik de Castro Lopo]

On Tue, 31 Aug 2004 08:29:27 -0500
John Goerzen <jgoerzen@complete.org> wrote:

> Now, I have complained here on several occasions about the size of the 
> standard OCaml library compared to that of, say, Python.  But I'm doing 
> something about it.  (http://quux.org/devel/missinglib)

John,

Is there a push to get some of that stuff pushed into the
standard library?

I keep on finding things that I want to do again and again,
which should be in the standard library but which seem to
be missing. A couple of examples I have found are:

  - a function to find the intersection of two lists
  - a function to remove duplicate entries in a list

I found the first as part of the MetaPRL project and wrote
the second myself, but both operations are so common they
should be part of the standard library.

In the spirit of John's post, is there any thing I can do
to help push functionality into the standard library?

Cheers,
Erik
-- 
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
  Erik de Castro Lopo  nospam@mega-nerd.com (Yes it's valid)
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
Oh my god! They killed init! You bastards!

-------------------
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

Re: [Caml-list] Cross-compiling OCaml

[Erik de Castro Lopo]

On Wed, 01 Sep 2004 23:22:45 +1000
I R T <rambam@bigpond.net.au> wrote:

> "Brandon J. Van Every" <vanevery@indiegamedesign.com> writes:
> 
> > But to offer a different philosophical take: Linux is boring too.
> > *Programming* is boring.  

If Brandon [0] thinks programming is boring he's free to take
up another pursuit and leave the coding to the people who enjoy
it.

Personally, I *LOVE* programming. I do it for a living AND I do
it for fun.

> All this from someone who says that he has not yet written a line of
> Ocaml.... 

And I especially love O'Caml even though I've only been coding
in it for 5-6 weeks.

Cheers,
Erik

[0] I only see Brandon's posts when somebody responds to a post
    from him. Hint, hint :-).
-- 
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
  Erik de Castro Lopo  nospam@mega-nerd.com (Yes it's valid)
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
Gambling(n): A discretionary tax on those asleep during high school
maths.

-------------------
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

Re: [Caml-list] Cross-compiling OCaml

[John Goerzen]

On Tuesday 31 August 2004 04:05 am, Brandon J. Van Every wrote:
> > What for ? It is boring, the tools are subadequat, and any
> > try to compile a
> > nice ocaml/lablgtk app for windows too resulted in no more
> > than a major time lose.
>
> I already explained why I'm stuck with Windows.
>
> But to offer a different philosophical take: Linux is boring too.
> *Programming* is boring.  I only care about the artistic results, the
> games I could make via programming.  I'm interested in tools that

Ahh, that is not why I am here.

I am here because programming is fun and exciting.  I am here because I 
like to try new or different things.  I like to open my mind to ideas I 
haven't heard before, to concepts that are new to me.  OCaml has more 
of that than any other language I've learned in a long time, even 
though I do have experience with functional, imperative, and OO 
languages.  I am still trying to consider all the possibilities that 
camlp4 opens up, and that's just one aspect of it.  The native code 
compilation means that, with a shell on an ARM machine, I can compile 
OCaml code to run on my Zaurus without the need for a large runtime 
environment.  The bytecode compilation means that I can take this stuff 
I compiled on Linux and run it on AIX.

> make it all less painful.  Emphasis on *less* painful.  There's still
> plenty of pain to be had from OCaml, same as any current programming
> language. Nobody has written the UberLanguage yet.  I'm not even sure

Yes, there is pain everywhere.  I've never been one to shy away from the 
"all foo sucks, but foo x sucks less" [1].

But if you hate programming, then stop doing it.  Find something you 
enjoy.

> the paradigm of 'written computer language' is what we need.  I think
> we need voice driven programming and a biological model of software
> grafting.  In other words, computers need to work like we do.

I'd much rather use a keyboard to tell the computer what to do than have 
to listen to the conversations of everyone else with their computers.

Besides, written communication has been around for a very long time, 
too.  It predates the invention of the digital computer by, oh, several 
millennia.  I think it's quite false to complain that using written 
communication is somehow forcing humans to work like computers.

> So, to me that's a problem to be solved.

Then SOLVE IT ALREADY.

-- 
John Goerzen
Author, Foundations of Python Network Programming
http://www.complete.org/pynet

-------------------
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

Re: [Caml-list] Cross-compiling OCaml

[John Goerzen]

On Tuesday 31 August 2004 04:05 am, Brandon J. Van Every wrote:
> james woodyatt wrote:
> > I'd rather that the Windows-centric guys on the list put their time
> > into good Windows support for Ocaml,
>
> No problem.  As I said, I realize Linux / mingw guys aren't into
> this.
>
> I'm just objecting to the statement that Linux cross-compilation
> support "would indeed be a great great additional functionality."  As

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?  It could involve 
running a compiler on x86 Linux to target arm Zaurus, or m68k Linux, or 
x86 FreeBSD, or amd64 Linux.  Or running a compiler on PowerPC NetBSD 
to target Alpha NetBSD.  Or whatever else.

Believe it or not, this *is* useful.  In some cases, the target platform 
does not have enough resources to support a development environment 
(for instance, Arm-based PDAs).  In other cases, the target platform 
may not be available for the developers.  Or, it may be excruciatingly 
slow.  Or perhaps it is being bootstrapped and programs are being 
compiled for it for the first time.  Or perhaps it just sucks to work 
with (*cough* Windows *cough*).

> 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.

> grow, so that there's more OCaml stuff available for all of us, and
> more paying OCaml jobs, then growth on the Windows platform is
> important. 

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.

> Of course, some people don't have a platform-neutral world view. 

Actually, I think you'll find most people here *DO* have a 
platform-neutral "world view".

> Some people want Windows to die, more than anything else.  My own
> view is I just want platforms to be rendered irrelevant.  In the real
> world that means various engineering compromises, because platforms
> aren't the same.

Fine, but somebody HAS TO DO THE WORK to port things to such a 
different, expensive, and problematic platform.  It's a lot easier to 
port Linux code to FreeBSD than to Windows.  And a lot cheaper.

> Some of the archives I've crossed indicate that Cf may have no users
> at all, not just a lack of interest from Windows users.  Have you
> achieved a core of Linux users yet?  Nobody's going to bother to port
> stuff to Windows when the library hasn't proven its utility.

So you are saying that nobody on Windows is willing to try something 
new?  That they're only interested in "proven" technologies?  That it's 
only useful if it's popular?

In that case, you've convinced me to write off the Windows platform for 
MissingLib.  Thank you.

> Also, it helps to have a Sourceforge CVS project or the equivalent.
> http://www.wetware.com/jhw/src/ is digging.  You may actually be a
> very effective organizer, with wonderful source code.  But it doesn't
> look organized, it isn't publically indexed, it isn't publically
> source controlled, it isn't accessible in the way Sourceforge
> projects are. Also you have no webpage or mailing list for your
> project.

That's right.  It's accessible EASIER than SF projects are.  It took me 
about 2 seconds to get to what I'd want and download it.

With SF, it takes a lot longer.  First, I have to hope that SourceForge 
is up at the time.  Next, I have to find the appropriate project page, 
click on Files, wait for that to load.  Now, I get to click on a file 
to download and have yet ANOTHER page to wait to load.  There, I have 
to select a mirror, and finally I might possibly get a download if that 
mirror is reachable at the time.

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

> > and frankly— it's not like it really bugs
> > me.  It just tells me that Windows-centric guys don't like my code.
> > That's fine.  I don't like theirs all that much either.
>
> Your conclusion doesn't fit the available data.  The available data
> is your project has hardly gotten off the ground.  You have a
> recruitment problem.  You haven't solved it, because you haven't
> established basic infrastructure for such recruitment.

Although, according to you, the problem is that Windows people won't use 
something unless it's already popular.  So it's an insoluble problem 
for him, isn't it?

> Should I fault you for the public administration of your project? 

Oh please, tell us what is so wrong with posting the source code easily 
accessible as a tarball.  Is it that Windows people can't figure out 
how to use Winzip?

-- 
John Goerzen
Author, Foundations of Python Network Programming
http://www.complete.org/pynet

-------------------
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

Re: [Caml-list] Cross-compiling OCaml

[John Goerzen]

On Tuesday 31 August 2004 01:50 am, Brandon J. Van Every wrote:
> Sven Luther wrote:
> > This would indeed be a great great additional functionality.
>
> Well, speaking as a Windows-centric guy, I'd rather people just put
> their time into good Windows support.  I realize that the Linux /

As you've obviously noticed from the responses to the post, nobody here 
seems to want to ever touch Windows if they can possibly avoid it.  And 
I don't blame them.  The whole platform is a mess, and programming 
there is even more of a mess, and if you do it the "normal" way, it's 
also incredibly expensive:

Windows XP Pro Retail                  $194  (newegg.com)
Visual Studio                         $1645  (buy.com)
------------------------------------- ------------------
Total cost                            $1839

1 CD-R to burn a Debian ISO           $0.30 or less

Why should I pay so much for the privilege of developing on a platform I 
hate?

> mingw crowd isn't so inclined towards that.  I'm just saying that
> mainstream Windows developers don't see cross-compilation from Linux
> as valuable. First class native Windows support is what counts.

Well then, show me the code.

I am tired of you complaining about this or that feature that nobody 
wants, demanding people write it because the gaming marketplace wants 
it, and doing nothing at all to address it.  This is not the only place 
you've been doing that.

Now, I have complained here on several occasions about the size of the 
standard OCaml library compared to that of, say, Python.  But I'm doing 
something about it.  (http://quux.org/devel/missinglib)

This list is not your pro bono private contractor.  Everybody here is 
working on/with OCaml because either 1) they are getting paid to do so, 
or 2) they want to do so.

I seriously doubt that anybody here wants to work with Windows.  So 
unless you come up with some cash or code, shut up already.

> N.B. I'm not Windows-centric out of any love for Windows or
> Microsoft. Rather, I'm a game developer.  To make money commercially,
> that's the platform I'm stuck with.  For computer games, Mac barely
> has the legs to bother with, and Linux certainly doesn't.

OK then.  How about porting whatever it is in OCaml that doesn't work on 
Windows?  Go ahead.  I'm sure if you do a good job of it, people will 
be happy to take your patches.

> Cheers,                         www.indiegamedesign.com

And oh yes, that 30-line signature really improved the quality of your 
post...

-- 
John Goerzen
Author, Foundations of Python Network Programming
http://www.complete.org/pynet

-------------------
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

RE: [Caml-list] Cross-compiling OCaml

[Brandon J. Van Every]

Sven Luther wrote:
> Brandon J. Van Every wrote:
> >
> > I already explained why I'm stuck with Windows.
>
> Only because you chose to, nobody is ever stuck with windows.

To belabor a point: yes, I choose to develop commercial games.  Windows
PCs and consoles are the primary markets for those.  I believe the
choice of problem domain is first, language is second, and OS is third.
If you can get Linux onto 50% of the home users' desktops, great, do so.
I'll give Linux equal attention at that time.  Meanwhile, Microsoft has
95% of the consumer desktop marketshare.  They've got the job done
today, so that's where we play.

> Just go over and develop under linux, and cross compile.
> doing this in windows
> is order of magnitudes more painfull, as you noticed.

I think you're underestimating the number of other resources that need
to be accessed on Windows to ship a high quality commercial title.
Although it may eventually be possible to wrap up such tools under an
OCaml-centric, platform-neutral rubric, that day is not today.  If you
have any serious interest in the problem, please join us on
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocamlgames/ and also look at
http://sourceforge.net/projects/ocalibs/

> > > Well, but i guess the majority of caml developers are
> > > compiling under linux, so ...
> >
> > So, to me that's a problem to be solved.
>
> No its not, that is how it should be.

I see.  Linux is The One True Operating System [TM].  Ok, we have
intractable world views.  You're a Linux booster, and I don't like any
platform.


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

Re: [Caml-list] Cross-compiling OCaml

[Sven Luther]

On Tue, Aug 31, 2004 at 02:05:58AM -0700, Brandon J. Van Every wrote:
> Sven Luther wrote:
> > Brandon J. Van Every wrote:
> > >
> > > Well, speaking as a Windows-centric guy, I'd rather people just put
> > > their time into good Windows support.  I realize that the
> > > Linux / mingw
> >
> > What for ? It is boring, the tools are subadequat, and any
> > try to compile a
> > nice ocaml/lablgtk app for windows too resulted in no more
> > than a major time lose.
> 
> I already explained why I'm stuck with Windows.

Only because you chose to, nobody is ever stuck with windows.

> But to offer a different philosophical take: Linux is boring too.
> *Programming* is boring.  I only care about the artistic results, the

Well, in linux at least it just works, you have the right tools for doing real
development and so on.

> games I could make via programming.  I'm interested in tools that make
> it all less painful.  Emphasis on *less* painful.  There's still plenty

Just go over and develop under linux, and cross compile. doing this in windows
is order of magnitudes more painfull, as you noticed.

> > Well, but i guess the majority of caml developers are
> > compiling under linux, so ...
> 
> So, to me that's a problem to be solved.

No its not, that is how it should be.

> > And things will probably change drastically from your
> > current perceived situation over the next 5 years or so.
> 
> Would be plenty happy to discuss it on ocaml-biz.
> http://cgorski.org/mailman/listinfo/ocaml-biz_cgorski.org

Sorry, no time for that. But let's have a followup to this 5 years from now.

Friendly,

Sven Luther

-------------------
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

RE: [Caml-list] Cross-compiling OCaml

[Brandon J. Van Every]

Sven Luther wrote:
> Brandon J. Van Every wrote:
> >
> > Well, speaking as a Windows-centric guy, I'd rather people just put
> > their time into good Windows support.  I realize that the
> > Linux / mingw
>
> What for ? It is boring, the tools are subadequat, and any
> try to compile a
> nice ocaml/lablgtk app for windows too resulted in no more
> than a major time lose.

I already explained why I'm stuck with Windows.

But to offer a different philosophical take: Linux is boring too.
*Programming* is boring.  I only care about the artistic results, the
games I could make via programming.  I'm interested in tools that make
it all less painful.  Emphasis on *less* painful.  There's still plenty
of pain to be had from OCaml, same as any current programming language.
Nobody has written the UberLanguage yet.  I'm not even sure the paradigm
of 'written computer language' is what we need.  I think we need voice
driven programming and a biological model of software grafting.  In
other words, computers need to work like we do.

> > First class native Windows support is what counts.
> >
> Well, but i guess the majority of caml developers are
> compiling under linux, so ...

So, to me that's a problem to be solved.

> And things will probably change drastically from your
> current perceived situation over the next 5 years or so.

Would be plenty happy to discuss it on ocaml-biz.
http://cgorski.org/mailman/listinfo/ocaml-biz_cgorski.org


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

RE: [Caml-list] Cross-compiling OCaml

[Brandon J. Van Every]

james woodyatt wrote:
> Brandon J. Van Every wrote:
> > Sven Luther wrote:
> >>
> >> This would indeed be a great great additional functionality.
> >
> > Well, speaking as a Windows-centric guy, I'd rather people just put
> > their time into good Windows support. [...]
>
> I'd rather that the Windows-centric guys on the list put their time
> into good Windows support for Ocaml,

No problem.  As I said, I realize Linux / mingw guys aren't into this.

I'm just objecting to the statement that Linux cross-compilation support
"would indeed be a great great additional functionality."  As far as
core Windows developers are concerned, and getting OCaml adopted by
them, this is irrelevant.  This is relevant to Linuxers who don't want
to deal with Windows, but nevertheless want a token level of support for
their apps on Windows.

> rather than continually harping at people like me,

I didn't harp at you.  I don't think I even harped at Sven.

> who couldn't give a rat's patootie whether the existing
> level of support for Windows improves any time soon.

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 grow, so that
there's more OCaml stuff available for all of us, and more paying OCaml
jobs, then growth on the Windows platform is important.

Of course, some people don't have a platform-neutral world view.  Some
people want Windows to die, more than anything else.  My own view is I
just want platforms to be rendered irrelevant.  In the real world that
means various engineering compromises, because platforms aren't the
same.

> I haven't ported my Cf library to Windows because I don't have a
> Windows box and I'm not a Windows developer.  I put forward a
> call for
> Windows-centric guys on this list over a year ago to help me get my
> library ported and compiling under Microsoft Visual-C with
> the straight
> Windows Ocaml port.  I have had not a single ping on the
> subject.

Well, it's only by archive searching that I'm remembering anything about
your library.  I don't remember what it does, and the words "Cf" and
"Pagoda" don't stick in my mind as descriptive terms.  I only remember
someone posting recently about a "Core Foundation" library.  Several
people didn't understand from the announcement text what the library was
supposed to do.  I only remember the announcement because I crossed it
again while Googling about Cf, per this discussion.

Some of the archives I've crossed indicate that Cf may have no users at
all, not just a lack of interest from Windows users.  Have you achieved
a core of Linux users yet?  Nobody's going to bother to port stuff to
Windows when the library hasn't proven its utility.

Also, it helps to have a Sourceforge CVS project or the equivalent.
http://www.wetware.com/jhw/src/ is digging.  You may actually be a very
effective organizer, with wonderful source code.  But it doesn't look
organized, it isn't publically indexed, it isn't publically source
controlled, it isn't accessible in the way Sourceforge projects are.
Also you have no webpage or mailing list for your project.

> It's like they don't even notice,

Should they have?  Have you done some kind of exceptional effort to get
the word out to everybody and anybody?  Marketing is a hard problem.  I
don't know what you've actually done, but asking for volunteers once is
not marketing.

> and frankly— it's not like it really bugs
> me.  It just tells me that Windows-centric guys don't like my code.
> That's fine.  I don't like theirs all that much either.

Your conclusion doesn't fit the available data.  The available data is
your project has hardly gotten off the ground.  You have a recruitment
problem.  You haven't solved it, because you haven't established basic
infrastructure for such recruitment.

> Meanwhile, not a week goes by on this list without some
> Windows-centric
> guy complaining about the vacuum of Windows support for Ocaml.  I'm
> starting to believe the problem is that Windows-centric guys are lazy
> bums who whine too much about what other people choose to do
> with their
> time when they should be spending their own time coding on
> things that are important to them.

Should I fault you for the public administration of your project?  I'll
choose not to, if you choose not to blame 'Windows whiners' for your
project status.


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

Re: [Caml-list] Cross-compiling OCaml

[Sven Luther]

On Mon, Aug 30, 2004 at 11:50:27PM -0700, Brandon J. Van Every wrote:
> Sven Luther wrote:
> >
> > This would indeed be a great great additional functionality.
> 
> Well, speaking as a Windows-centric guy, I'd rather people just put
> their time into good Windows support.  I realize that the Linux / mingw

What for ? It is boring, the tools are subadequat, and any try to compile a
nice ocaml/lablgtk app for windows too resulted in no more than a major time lose.

> crowd isn't so inclined towards that.  I'm just saying that mainstream
> Windows developers don't see cross-compilation from Linux as valuable.
> First class native Windows support is what counts.

Well, but i guess the majority of caml developers are compiling under linux,
so ... And things will probably change drastically from your current perceived
situation over the next 5 years or so.

Friendly,

Sven Luther

-------------------
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

Re: [Caml-list] Cross-compiling OCaml

[james woodyatt]

On 30 Aug 2004, at 23:50, Brandon J. Van Every wrote:
> Sven Luther wrote:
>>
>> This would indeed be a great great additional functionality.
>
> Well, speaking as a Windows-centric guy, I'd rather people just put 
> their time into good Windows support. [...]

I'd rather that the Windows-centric guys on the list put their time 
into good Windows support for Ocaml, rather than continually harping at 
people like me, who couldn't give a rat's patootie whether the existing 
level of support for Windows improves any time soon.

I haven't ported my Cf library to Windows because I don't have a 
Windows box and I'm not a Windows developer.  I put forward a call for 
Windows-centric guys on this list over a year ago to help me get my 
library ported and compiling under Microsoft Visual-C with the straight 
Windows Ocaml port.  I have had not a single ping on the subject.  It's 
like they don't even notice, and frankly— it's not like it really bugs 
me.  It just tells me that Windows-centric guys don't like my code.  
That's fine.  I don't like theirs all that much either.

Meanwhile, not a week goes by on this list without some Windows-centric 
guy complaining about the vacuum of Windows support for Ocaml.  I'm 
starting to believe the problem is that Windows-centric guys are lazy 
bums who whine too much about what other people choose to do with their 
time when they should be spending their own time coding on things that 
are important to them.


-- 
j h woodyatt <jhw@wetware.com>
markets are only free to the people who own them.
-------------------
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

RE: [Caml-list] Cross-compiling OCaml

[Brandon J. Van Every]

Sven Luther wrote:
>
> This would indeed be a great great additional functionality.

Well, speaking as a Windows-centric guy, I'd rather people just put
their time into good Windows support.  I realize that the Linux / mingw
crowd isn't so inclined towards that.  I'm just saying that mainstream
Windows developers don't see cross-compilation from Linux as valuable.
First class native Windows support is what counts.

N.B. I'm not Windows-centric out of any love for Windows or Microsoft.
Rather, I'm a game developer.  To make money commercially, that's the
platform I'm stuck with.  For computer games, Mac barely has the legs to
bother with, and Linux certainly doesn't.


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

Re: [Caml-list] Cross-compiling OCaml

[Sven Luther]

On Mon, Aug 30, 2004 at 02:02:26PM -0700, Ken Rose wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> 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.

There is no such thing. I tried this, using the mingw cross environment in
debian, and altough i was able to build cross gtk+ programs without problem
(well, there where some troubles with fonts, but apart of that it worked
great), my tries to cross-build ocaml failed lamentably.

This would indeed be a great great additional functionality.

Friendly,

Sven Luther

-------------------
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

Re: [Caml-list] Cross-compiling OCaml

[Erik de Castro Lopo]

On Mon, 30 Aug 2004 14:02:26 -0700
Ken Rose <kenrose@tfb.com> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> 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.

That is a very nice idea and something I would find useful too.

Having played with the MinGW cros-compilers I know that this is
probably far from trivial :-).

Erik
-- 
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
  Erik de Castro Lopo  nospam@mega-nerd.com (Yes it's valid)
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
"And MS thinks Linux is vulnerable to forking? 95, 95 OEM SR2, 98, 98SE,
ME, NT, 2000, Bob, .NET, CE, Datacenter, Server, Adv. Server, and now
Web Server, sheesh." -- BTS on LinuxToday.com

-------------------
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

[Caml-list] Cross-compiling OCaml

[Ken Rose]

Hi,

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.

Thanks

  - ken

-------------------
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