English version
Accueil     À propos     Téléchargement     Ressources     Contactez-nous    

Ce site est rarement mis à jour. Pour les informations les plus récentes, rendez-vous sur le nouveau site OCaml à l'adresse ocaml.org.

Browse thread
Re: Redefinition doesn't work
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: 2000-11-03 (15:13)
From: Mattias Waldau <mattias.waldau@a...>
Subject: Good programming languages (Was: Redefinition doesn't work)
>> So better start by saying ``if you want to obtain this effect, you
>> just have to reload the entire program''!

>> Pierre Weis

Sorry, I don't buy your arguments. The most important aspects of a
programming language for me is:

1. typed (to find typo-like bugs, or when changing the program)
2. interactive environment (to be able to test hard part of the program
without have to write elaborate function just for testing)
3. easy to use and understand libraries.
4. good syntax, which makes it easy to write the correct code
5. fast
6. portable, works on windows and linux
7. good support or good open source team
8. cheap

On a scale from 1 to 5, where 5 is the best,
Ocaml would get 5 for typed,
3 for interactive environment (better than C, Java, SML, but much worse than
Lisp, Prolog, Scheme, examples of problem: #relet, not very good
emacs-modes, no object-browser),
2 for easy to use libraries (it is so hard to find the right function, I
have to search thru the PDF-file all the time),
2 for good syntax (it is very easy to spend a lot of time trying to get the
program to compile, for example I called a attribute in a record 'value',
and that works sometimes I have noticed :-),
5 for fast,
5 for portable (when ocamldebug works on windows)
4 for good support (I tried to understand the source code of ocaml, but my
French is to bad.)
5 for cheap

Very good scores for ocaml, but there are places for improvements.