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: 2001-06-15 (15:04)
From: Jonathan Coupe <jonathan@m...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] ocaml complexity
> Tore Lund <> writes:
> > The one thing that definitely needs fixing if OCaml is ever to catch on
> > is the *name*.  For my own part it took some time before my brain even
> > registered that there was such a language, and I am sure this was due to
> > the unwieldy abbreviation "OCaml" - it looks like a typo or line noise
> > the first time you see it.

> > Earlier, when asked `which language do you use for it?' I used to
> > answer `Objective See Ay Em Ell', but people often thought I meant
> > `Objective C', then :-) Now I say `Objective Camel'.  It means a bit
> > more to them than just `Oh-Camel'.  Unfortunately, they get the
> > impression that it's some obscure object oriented language like
> > Smalltalk now, so I add `a functional language'.

The biggest source of confusion I've noticed is with Occam - a pascaloid (?)
language for parallel processing.

- Jonathan

Bug reports:  FAQ:
To unsubscribe, mail  Archives: