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: 2001-06-08 (22:08)
From: Jonathan Coupe <jonathan@m...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] ocaml complexity

> On Fri, Jun 08, 2001 at 01:22:44PM -0700, Chris Hecker wrote:
> >
> > Do people actually see the current "market penetration" of ocaml as a
> > One big problem would be if INRIA didn't think it was popular enough to
> > continue funding it, but anything short of that is not disasterous.  We
> > get more libraries and whatnot with more people, but there would be
> > to more popularity as well.
> I certainly don't think Ocaml's popularity or lack thereof is a problem
and I
> agree there advantages in letting it grow at its own pace.  I'm mainly
> interested in increasing its market penetration where I work so I can stop
> writing Python code.
> --
> miles

Is Ocaml's acceptability at Pixar independent of its use in the larger
marketplace? If so, I'm surprised. (I believed that the opposite was the
case for Lisp, from your comments on cll.) The more people who use a
language, the more useful it is through the availability of tools, libraries
and trained programmers. And yes, the more politically acceptable it is to
decision makers. Which is fair enough - what if INRIA does stop supporting

There's also the larger question of our professional responsibility to
society. Software quality is a key (though usual buried) problem for the
modern world. Tools that can improve it are good. Ocaml has significant
potential to do that. I'd hate to see it under used to the extent that CLOS
and Smalltalk are.


Bug reports:  FAQ:
To unsubscribe, mail  Archives: