> Does any one have clues or positive experience about convincing
> management to switch to Ocaml?

> My manager's arguments are:
> 
> * There is an existing (important) code base (a static C code
> analyser) coded in C and C++ and it is unreasonable to recode it.

Interface OCaml to the C code (C++ is harder if you use exception)
if that makes sense (but maybe it doesn't).

> * Ocaml is a slow implentation

Can be refuted. ocamlopt is not that bad, and brings more
advantages (e.g. symbolic-manipulation requires decent and safe memory
allocation, safe typing and all that).

> * Ocaml is hard to learn for people (fluent in C++) with less than a PhD
> in computer science (unfortunately for me, I do hold a PhD in
> Artif. Intel.)

Simple test: throw the OCaml distribution at a C++ engineer, ask the guy
to write a semi-simple program in it. Chances are the engineer will be able
to do that in one afternoon (including installing the compiler). 
This is based on a true story (tech due diligence on us by people we're working
with, I can't disclose the name).

> * Ocaml might not last long (but ESPRIT projects don't last neither)

True, but the compiler is stable. How often do you need to update the compiler 
?

> ESPRIT projects are supposed to be preindustrial and OCaml is only academic

How many ESPRIT projects actually produce code that is being used ?


--f