Version française
Home     About     Download     Resources     Contact us    

This site is updated infrequently. For up-to-date information, please visit the new OCaml website at

Browse thread
Re: [Caml-list] ocaml complexity
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: -- (:)
From: Pierre Weis <Pierre.Weis@i...>
Subject: Re: Why is Ocaml better than Java (WAS: [Caml-list] ocaml complexity)
> The real questions is how to convince a Java-programmer to start using
> Ocaml.
> The arguments I can list is:
> - speed
> - polymorphism, no casting needed (will be solved in next generation of
> Java, so this
> argument will disappear)
> - closures (however can always be programmed using local class with
> ()-method)
> - better typechecking makes higher order functions simple to use (however, I
>   think that a local class in Java will be as good)
> - compact programs (Java programs are very long)
> - easy integration with C (easy in VB, I haven't tried it in Java)
> Plz help me with more arguments
> /mattias
> -------------------
> Bug reports:  FAQ: 
> To unsubscribe, mail  Archives:

The more interesting features Caml offers to the programmer are

- concrete data types (sum types) along with pattern matching
- abstraction facilities thanks to modules (providing abstract data types)

The salient feeling you have when using the compiler is its
strictness: it ``seems'' to be clever enough to track down your bugs
via typechecking and pattern matching analysis.

Best regards,

Pierre Weis

INRIA, Projet Cristal,,

Bug reports:  FAQ:
To unsubscribe, mail  Archives: