From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7166BC48 for ; Fri, 11 Mar 2005 18:39:05 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail28.sea5.speakeasy.net (mail28.sea5.speakeasy.net [69.17.117.30]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id j2BHd3bL010235 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Fri, 11 Mar 2005 18:39:05 +0100 Received: (qmail 23061 invoked from network); 11 Mar 2005 17:39:02 -0000 Received: from shell2.sea5.speakeasy.net ([69.17.116.3]) (envelope-sender ) by mail28.sea5.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP for ; 11 Mar 2005 17:39:02 -0000 Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 09:39:02 -0800 (PST) From: brogoff To: Julien Boulnois Cc: Christian Lindig , caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Subject: Re: Re: [Caml-list] pocengine In-Reply-To: <1110530272-8ac9134c4661470d3867c91db03ff609@rashitoul.net> Message-ID: References: <1110530272-8ac9134c4661470d3867c91db03ff609@rashitoul.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Miltered: at nez-perce with ID 4231D7B7.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 ocaml:01 ocaml:01 literate:01 sml:01 wrote:01 speakeasy:01 interaction:01 data:02 python:02 programming:03 brian:03 scheme:04 scheme:04 fri:05 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 (2004-11-16) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled version=3.0.2 X-Spam-Level: On Fri, 11 Mar 2005, Julien Boulnois wrote: > >I am just curious. Are you using the C implementation of Lua? There is > >also an OCaml of Lua, albeit only for Lua 2.5. I am using it for my own > >projects. > > > >http://www.cminusminus.org/code.html#luaml > > I'm using the very good OCaml implementation, because interaction with lua data is easier and Lua 2.5 is suffisant for our needs. > > Julien Boulnois I also use and like the OCaml Lua implementation. I think there is something to the approach of having a separate simple configuration language. I'd probably have chosen Python, but Lua and Scheme were the ones I wouldn't have to write, and often users don't like Scheme. One petty complaint I have is that I'm not a fan of literate programming, and while it's just a bit of grunt work (same kind of grunt work converting SML to OCaml :) to deliteralize it, I'd appreciate it more if it were just a plain old OCaml source distribution. -- Brian