Version française
Home     About     Download     Resources     Contact us    
Browse thread
[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: David Fox <dsf@f...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] ocaml complexity
Miles Egan <miles@caddr.com> writes:

> On Wed, Jun 06, 2001 at 09:36:16PM +0200, William Chesters wrote:
> > Miles Egan writes:
> > Objectively, C++ is much harder to learn than ocaml and you have to be
> > _brilliant_ to make the most of it without getting into trouble.  The
> > point surely is that people are more familiar, or at least feel
> > embarrassed about being unfamiliar, with the _jargon_ of C++ as
> > against that of ocaml.
> 
> C++ is certainly a pathological worst case, and I can't really think
> of another language as baroque and confusing (certainly not Ocaml).

Not to belabor the obvious, but C++ has the huge advantage of being
(for all practical purposes) a superset of C.  Its like the mother of
all tutorials.
-------------------
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs  FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr  Archives: http://caml.inria.fr