From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 387EBBC57 for ; Wed, 3 Mar 2010 09:12:33 +0100 (CET) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AtY8ACeojUtQW+UMgWdsb2JhbACRJ4llFQEBFiQivjGEewSFZA X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,573,1262559600"; d="scan'208";a="45896332" Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]) by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 03 Mar 2010 09:12:32 +0100 Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Nmjh1-0008BV-J6 for caml-list@inria.fr; Wed, 03 Mar 2010 09:12:31 +0100 Received: from ks300734.kimsufi.com ([91.121.65.225]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 03 Mar 2010 09:12:31 +0100 Received: from sylvain by ks300734.kimsufi.com with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 03 Mar 2010 09:12:31 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: caml-list@inria.fr From: Sylvain Le Gall Subject: Re: gc overhead Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2010 08:12:21 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <37150F07-8902-464A-9A0E-44A0C424C87B@gmail.com> <64042246-59C5-4B75-B5A9-6FDF7A2814AE@gmail.com> <4B8DC246.2080507@gmail.com> X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ks300734.kimsufi.com User-Agent: slrn/pre1.0.0-11 (Linux) X-Spam: no; 0.00; le-gall:01 developpers:01 edgar:98 warren:98 inactive:98 wrote:01 wrote:01 philosophy:02 bugs:03 debugging:03 debugging:03 maintainance:03 library:03 overhead:04 profiling:04 Hello, On 03-03-2010, Edgar Friendly wrote: > On 03/02/2010 06:09 PM, Warren Harris wrote: >> On Mar 2, 2010, at 2:03 PM, Sylvain Le Gall wrote: >>> >>> You can have a look at: >>> http://ocamlviz.forge.ocamlcore.org >>> >> Thanks! This looks very promising. I'll give it a try. >> > > Overall, good job. But is it going to die or stay maintained? > Well, I hope it will stay maintained. At least source code, bugs and release on the forge will stay there for a long time (I can make promise on this part). And whenever current developpers become inactive, OCamlCore.org administrators can move ownership to other (with notice to current owner, of course): http://www.ocamlcore.org/philosophy/ (point 4) But anyway, this kind of tool is targeted at debugging on the first place. It is not a mandatory piece of a software/library. You can lie without it, when you have finished your job debugging/profiling your program. So I would say that long term maintainance should not bother user for now. It is actually something that is lightweight and that works. To my mind this is enough to consider using it. If a lot of people start using it, it is highly probable that it will stay maintained. Regards Sylvain Le Gall