- 2001-01-02 (11:06) Re: status of some big "important" features?
- 2001-01-02 (11:07) Re: labltk bind ~events list questions/bugs?
- 2001-01-02 (11:06) Re: status of some big "important" features?
- 2001-01-02 (17:02) Re: A proposal for overloading ...
- 2001-01-02 (17:02) Happy New Year
- 2001-01-02 (17:03) Re: A proposal for overloading ...
- 2001-01-02 (17:04) JIT-compilation for OCaml?
- 2001-01-03 (10:46) Re: status of some big "important" features?
- 2001-01-03 (10:48) RE: JIT-compilation for OCaml?
- 2001-01-03 (10:50) Re: JIT-compilation for OCaml?
- 2001-01-03 (10:51) New Year's resolution suggestions...
- 2001-01-03 (10:51) Re: status of some big "important" features?
- 2001-01-03 (13:37) RE: JIT-compilation for OCaml?
- 2001-01-03 (13:36) Re: JIT-compilation for OCaml?
- 2001-01-03 (13:37) Re: New Year's resolution suggestions...
- 2001-01-03 (14:02) Re: labltk bind ~events list questions/bugs?
- 2001-01-03 (14:02) Re: labltk bind ~events list questions/bugs?
- 2001-01-04 (13:04) Re: JIT-compilation for OCaml?
- 2001-01-04 (13:04) Re: labltk bind ~events list questions/bugs?
- 2001-01-04 (13:05) RE: JIT-compilation for OCaml?
- 2001-01-04 (13:06) RE: JIT-compilation for OCaml?
- 2001-01-04 (13:07) Re: New Year's resolution suggestions...
- 2001-01-04 (13:09) Re: JIT-compilation for OCaml?
- 2001-01-04 (13:15) Re: New Year's resolution suggestions...
- 2001-01-04 (13:20) Re: JIT-compilation for OCaml?
- 2001-01-04 (13:24) Re: JIT-compilation for OCaml?
- 2001-01-04 (13:24) Re: JIT-compilation for OCaml?
- 2001-01-04 (13:26) Re: JIT-compilation for OCaml?
- 2001-01-04 (13:26) Re: JIT-compilation for OCaml?
- 2001-01-04 (13:28) Re: JIT-compilation for OCaml?
- 2001-01-04 (13:32) Re: JIT-compilation for OCaml?
- 2001-01-04 (13:33) Re: JIT-compilation for OCaml?
- 2001-01-04 (13:39) RE: New Year's resolution suggestions...
- 2001-01-04 (20:19) lablgtk for Win32
- 2001-01-04 (20:19) Re: JIT-compilation for OCaml?
- 2001-01-04 (20:19) Optional fields in modules
- 2001-01-04 (21:01) printf - partial application bug
- 2001-01-04 (21:18) IBMs UVM? RE: JIT-compilation for OCaml?
- 2001-01-04 (21:22) Re: printf - partial application bug
- 2001-01-06 (21:00) Re: New Year's resolution suggestions...
- 2001-01-06 (21:02) Re: JIT-compilation for OCaml?
- 2001-01-06 (21:05) Re: lablgtk for Win32
- 2001-01-06 (22:17) A good benchmark for Objective Caml
- 2001-01-06 (22:17) Re: lablgtk for Win32
- 2001-01-06 (22:18) Re: JIT-compilation for OCaml?
- 2001-01-06 (22:19) Re: lablgtk for Win32
- 2001-01-06 (22:19) Re: JIT-compilation for OCaml?
- 2001-01-06 (22:20) Re: JIT-compilation for OCaml?
- 2001-01-06 (22:20) Re: JIT-compilation for OCaml?
- 2001-01-06 (22:20) Re: lablgtk for Win32
- 2001-01-06 (22:21) Dynamic Caml v.0.1 download problems
- 2001-01-06 (22:21) Re: JIT-compilation for OCaml?
- 2001-01-06 (22:23) Module hierarchies
- 2001-01-07 (20:11) Re: JIT-compilation for OCaml?
- 2001-01-07 (20:16) first class modules (was: alternative module systems)
- 2001-01-07 (20:17) Re: A good benchmark for Objective Caml
- 2001-01-07 (20:17) 32-bit integer operations
- 2001-01-07 (20:18) RE: lablgtk for Win32
- 2001-01-07 (20:20) RE: Module hierarchies
- 2001-01-07 (20:22) RE: Module hierarchies
- 2001-01-07 (20:23) Re: Module hierarchies
- 2001-01-07 (21:30) Re: 32-bit integer operations
- 2001-01-07 (21:30) Re: A good benchmark for Objective Caml
- 2001-01-07 (21:29) RE: lablgtk for Win32
- 2001-01-08 (11:20) Re: first class modules (was: alternative module systems)
- 2001-01-08 (11:23) Re: JIT-compilation for OCaml?
- 2001-01-08 (11:27) Re: Module hierarchies
- 2001-01-08 (11:29) Re: first class modules (was: alternative module systems)
- 2001-01-08 (11:31) RE: first class modules (was: alternative module systems)
- 2001-01-08 (17:42) RE: first class modules (was: alternative module systems)
- 2001-01-08 (17:41) statut du Portage Ocaml <-> BeOS
- 2001-01-08 (17:49) Re: Module hierarchies
- 2001-01-08 (17:56) RE: first class modules (was: alternative module systems)
- 2001-01-08 (17:58) RE: first class modules (was: alternative module systems)
- 2001-01-08 (17:59) RE: first class modules (was: alternative module systems)
- 2001-01-09 (08:58) Re: lablgtk for Win32
- 2001-01-09 (09:01) Re: JIT-compilation for OCaml?
- 2001-01-09 (09:02) Re: JIT-compilation for OCaml?
- 2001-01-09 (09:04) Re: JIT-compilation for OCaml?
- 2001-01-09 (09:04) Re: Module hierarchies
- 2001-01-10 (08:23) RE: Module hierarchies
- 2001-01-10 (08:21) RE: first class modules (was: alternative module systems)
- 2001-01-10 (08:25) RE: JIT-compilation for OCaml?
- 2001-01-10 (08:27) RE: JIT-compilation for OCaml?
- 2001-01-10 (08:27) Re: Module hierarchies
- 2001-01-10 (08:31) RE: Module hierarchies
- 2001-01-10 (08:33) Re: first class modules (was: alternative module systems)
- 2001-01-10 (18:48) XML, HTTP, SOAP (was RE: JIT-compilation for OCaml?)
- 2001-01-10 (18:49) Re: Module hierarchies
- 2001-01-10 (18:51) RE: first class modules (was: alternative module systems)
- 2001-01-10 (18:53) Why can't I use val mover : < move : int -> unit; .. > list -> unit ?
- 2001-01-10 (18:57) questions about costs of nativeint vs int
- 2001-01-11 (09:23) Re: Why can't I use val mover : < move : int -> unit; .. > list -> unit ?
- 2001-01-11 (09:23) Re: Why can't I use val mover : < move : int -> unit; .. > list -> unit ?
- 2001-01-11 (09:24) RE: Module hierarchies
- 2001-01-11 (09:25) first class, recursive, mixin modules (was: RE: first class modules)
- 2001-01-11 (09:28) Re: JIT-compilation for OCaml?
- 2001-01-11 (09:31) Re: JIT-compilation for OCaml?
- 2001-01-11 (09:33) Re: Why can't I use val mover : < move : int -> unit; .. > list -> unit ?
- 2001-01-11 (09:32) RE: Why can't I use val mover : < move : int -> unit; .. > list -> unit ?
- 2001-01-11 (09:33) Cost of polymorphic variants over normal ones.
- 2001-01-11 (17:29) Re: JIT-compilation for OCaml?
- 2001-01-11 (17:30) RE: first class, recursive, mixin modules (was: RE: first class modules)
- 2001-01-11 (17:30) Re: Cost of polymorphic variants over normal ones.
- 2001-01-11 (17:32) Re: Cost of polymorphic variants over normal ones.
- 2001-01-11 (17:33) Re: Why can't I use val mover : < move : int -> unit; .. > list -> unit ?
- 2001-01-11 (17:37) RE: XML, HTTP, SOAP (was RE: JIT-compilation for OCaml?)
- 2001-01-11 (17:37) RE: JIT-compilation for OCaml?
- 2001-01-11 (17:38) RE: Module hierarchies
- 2001-01-11 (17:38) Unicode (was RE: JIT-compilation for OCaml?)
- 2001-01-11 (17:39) Re: Why can't I use val mover : < move : int -> unit; .. > list -> unit ?
- 2001-01-11 (17:42) Re: Cost of polymorphic variants over normal ones.
- 2001-01-12 (08:51) RE: first class, recursive, mixin modules (was: RE: first class m odules)
- 2001-01-12 (09:00) Re: questions about costs of nativeint vs int
- 2001-01-12 (09:02) Re: Unicode (was RE: JIT-compilation for OCaml?)
- 2001-01-12 (09:02) linear algebra libraries?
- 2001-01-12 (09:03) Re: Cost of polymorphic variants over normal ones.
- 2001-01-12 (09:06) RE: first class, recursive, mixin modules (was: RE: first class m odules)
- 2001-01-12 (09:08) restart any OCaml program from scratch:
- 2001-01-12 (09:09) Re: questions about costs of nativeint vs int
- 2001-01-12 (09:11) Re: Unicode (was RE: JIT-compilation for OCaml?)
- 2001-01-12 (09:14) Re: JIT-compilation for OCaml?
- 2001-01-12 (09:17) Re: JIT-compilation for OCaml?
- 2001-01-12 (09:19) Re: Unicode (was RE: JIT-compilation for OCaml?)
- 2001-01-12 (18:57) Re: linear algebra libraries?
- 2001-01-12 (18:57) Re: Unicode (was RE: JIT-compilation for OCaml?)
- 2001-01-12 (19:01) Re: linear algebra libraries?
- 2001-01-12 (19:02) Re: Unicode (was RE: JIT-compilation for OCaml?)
- 2001-01-12 (19:03) RE: questions about costs of nativeint vs int
- 2001-01-14 (20:20) live variables
- 2001-01-14 (20:18) RE: first class, recursive, mixin modules (was: RE: first class m odules)
- 2001-01-14 (20:17) Re: linear algebra libraries?
- 2001-01-14 (20:21) Re: linear algebra libraries?
- 2001-01-14 (20:23) RE: questions about costs of nativeint vs int
- 2001-01-14 (20:31) GC question
- 2001-01-14 (20:32) Re: Unicode (was RE: JIT-compilation for OCaml?)
- 2001-01-14 (20:35) Re: Unicode (was RE: JIT-compilation for OCaml?)
- 2001-01-14 (20:35) Re: Unicode (was RE: JIT-compilation for OCaml?)
- 2001-01-14 (20:38) A manual...
- 2001-01-14 (20:38) Re: questions about costs of nativeint vs int
- 2001-01-14 (20:39) Re: linear algebra libraries?
- 2001-01-14 (20:53) exec?
- 2001-01-14 (20:53) RE: first class, recursive, mixin modules (was: RE: first class m odules)
- 2001-01-15 (09:56) Re: questions about costs of nativeint vs int
- 2001-01-16 (10:36) RE: first class, recursive, mixin modules (was: RE: first class m odules)
- 2001-01-16 (10:42) Re: live variables
- 2001-01-16 (10:42) rappel: numero TSI special code mobile
- 2001-01-20 (15:05) Re: A manual...
- 2001-01-20 (15:06) Re: exec? - solved
- 2001-01-20 (15:09) [off-topic] Survey or book on programming language structures
- 2001-01-20 (15:09) Set Extension
- 2001-01-20 (15:11) R: A manual...
- 2001-01-20 (15:12) R: A manual...
- 2001-01-20 (15:18) RE: questions about costs of nativeint vs int
- 2001-01-20 (15:25) libplot for OCaml
- 2001-01-20 (15:26) Re: Unicode (was RE: JIT-compilation for OCaml?)
- 2001-01-20 (15:26) Re: Unicode (was RE: JIT-compilation for OCaml?)
- 2001-01-20 (15:31) unsigned comparisons on int32, int64, nativeint?
- 2001-01-20 (15:32) Re: Unicode (was RE: JIT-compilation for OCaml?)
- 2001-01-20 (15:33) more on nativeint interface
- 2001-01-20 (15:34) Location of the solutions to exercises in 'The Functional Approach to Programming'?
- 2001-01-20 (15:36) CamlIDL users & Visual Studio Integration
- 2001-01-20 (15:40) CPLEX/OCAML
- 2001-01-21 (21:20) Re: R: A manual...
- 2001-01-21 (21:18) Re: [off-topic] Survey or book on programming language structures
- 2001-01-21 (21:21) Re: unsigned comparisons on int32, int64, nativeint?
- 2001-01-21 (21:23) Re: more on nativeint interface
- 2001-01-21 (21:25) Implicit constraints in type declaration
- 2001-01-21 (21:31) Re: Implicit constraints in type declaration
- 2001-01-22 (21:55) RE: R: A manual...
- 2001-01-22 (21:55) Offre de stage
- 2001-01-22 (21:56) Re: [off-topic] Survey or book on programming language structures
- 2001-01-22 (21:58) Floating-point classification
- 2001-01-22 (21:59) Re: [off-topic] Survey or book on programming language structures
- 2001-01-22 (22:00) -custom under win32
- 2001-01-22 (22:05) Re: Unicode (was RE: JIT-compilation for OCaml?)
- 2001-01-22 (22:05) Re: Unicode (was RE: JIT-compilation for OCaml?)
- 2001-01-22 (22:06) Re: Unicode (was RE: JIT-compilation for OCaml?)
- 2001-01-23 (21:52) RE: R: A manual...
- 2001-01-23 (21:57) Re: GC question
- 2001-01-23 (21:58) Re: [off-topic] Survey or book on programming language structures
- 2001-01-23 (21:59) Re: -custom under win32
- 2001-01-23 (22:01) RE: -custom under win32
- 2001-01-24 (17:13) Re: Unicode (was RE: JIT-compilation for OCaml?)
- 2001-01-25 (08:04) RE: -custom under win32
- 2001-01-25 (08:07) Announcement: LACAML
- 2001-01-25 (08:09) Ocaml VM and bytecode
- 2001-01-25 (08:10) Lex and yacc
- 2001-01-26 (20:58) ** docteur camelia **
- 2001-01-26 (21:02) Re: Lex and yacc
- 2001-01-26 (21:03) Floating point array computations
- 2001-01-26 (21:04) Re: Announcement: LACAML
- 2001-01-26 (21:05) writing in file (byte after byte)
- 2001-01-26 (21:06) Re: Announcement: LACAML
- 2001-01-26 (21:09) Re: Announcement: LACAML
- 2001-01-26 (21:10) Re: Floating-point classification
- 2001-01-26 (21:11) LablTk
- 2001-01-26 (21:12) Re: Announcement: LACAML
- 2001-01-26 (21:29) Re: ** docteur camelia **
- 2001-01-26 (21:30) Consortium Caml
- 2001-01-31 (10:54) Re: R: Ocaml VM and bytecode
- 2001-01-31 (10:53) R: Ocaml VM and bytecode
- 2001-01-31 (10:52) Re: writing in file (byte after byte)
- 2001-01-31 (10:54) Re: Consortium Caml
- 2001-01-31 (10:58) classes mutually recursive
- 2001-01-31 (10:59) Re: LablTk
- 2001-01-31 (11:01) Problem compiling xpath/tests
- 2001-01-31 (11:33) JIT compilation
- 2001-01-31 (16:28) R: Ocaml VM and bytecode
- 2001-01-31 (16:28) Re: Ocaml VM and bytecode
- 2001-01-31 (16:29) list dead?
- 2001-01-31 (16:34) Print arbitrary value
- 2001-01-31 (16:34) Re: Ocaml VM and bytecode
- 2001-01-31 (16:47) Re: classes mutually recursive