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] The DLL-hell of O'Caml
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: 2002-03-11 (04:29)
From: Mark D. Anderson <mda@d...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] The DLL-hell of O'Caml
If someone is going to work on this, I'd recommend they look even more deeply
at what perl and python do. It is more than just "download over http"; there
are also issues of versioning among others.

Some of the things both those languages have, to greater or lesser degrees:

- there is a web site for humans with search and list, such as

- there is a command line which does search, list, and install, such as 
"perl -MCPAN -e shell" or "ppm"
(ppm is more an activestate thing; is distributed)
The install can deal with recursive dependencies if you want.

- the install utility can handle pure language packages, mixed language packages
with C source, and mixed language packages with pre-compiled C source
for one architecture (ppm is less flexible but simpler).

- really obscene things can be done with the perl "Inline" module:

- a single language install tree can handle a mixture of binary modules that vary by
architecture (i686-linux vs. MSWin32-x86-multi-thread) or by language version (5.005 vs. 5.6).
pure-language modules can vary by language version.
This is useful for multiple developers sharing a single install over NFS, or for
a single developer that is trying out multiple configurations.

- the language runtime does best effort when a package is asked for by name,
taking the "best-fit" one;
this prevents you having to upgrade all packages just because the language is


To unsubscribe, mail Archives:
Bug reports: FAQ:
Beginner's list: