Browse thread
Re: [Caml-list] Unix.file_descr -> int ???
- Ohad Rodeh
[
Home
]
[ Index:
by date
|
by threads
]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: | 2002-06-20 (12:25) |
From: | Ohad Rodeh <ORODEH@i...> |
Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] Unix.file_descr -> int ??? |
Regarding industry problems that Caml may be able to solve. Well, here's one. As part of research, I'm building a file-system, where the user-space parts are written in my favorite programming language :-) (you guessed correctly ...) Communication between C and ML components in mostly restricted to sockets. Here lies the problem: I need to marshal to and from network order integers (16byte,32byte,64bytes). I would be helpful if Caml supported marshaling to/from these types directly. for example: type ofs = int get_int16 : string -> ofs -> int get_int32 : string -> ofs -> int32 get_int64 : string -> ofs -> int64 Ohad. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ohad Rodeh tel: +972-9-9527641 IBM Haifa, storage research Markus Mottl <markus@oefai.at> To: Xavier Leroy <xavier.leroy@inria.fr> Sent by: cc: Alessandro Baretta <alex@baretta.com>, Ocaml owner-caml-list@pauill <caml-list@inria.fr> ac.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Unix.file_descr -> int ??? 20/06/2002 14:52 Please respond to Markus Mottl On Thu, 20 Jun 2002, Xavier Leroy wrote: > I'm not disturbed in the least by the fact that many computer > professionals couldn't care less about what we do. (And conversely :-) > What I am concerned about is the well-meaning suggestions that we > should move towards "their" technologies in the vague hope that they > will pay more attention then. They won't. I don't think that the problem is about moving towards "their" technologies but moving OCaml and its tools towards "their" problem domain. It's definitely not the job of INRIA to do this, though some help might make this task easier for the commercial programmers among us (not me). This usually boils down to adhering to or defining somewhat accepted standards. E.g., I suppose that many programmers would be happy about locale support or libraries in the distribution that handle some high-level standard internet protocols, etc. It might be a good idea to define some set of rules that allows people external to INRIA to write libraries in such a way that they could be accepted in the standard distribution. Or even better, to define and implement standard packaging schemes that make seamless integration of 3rd party libraries easy. Then the community could much more effectively take over the burden of providing OCaml-libraries and tools for commercial use. Regards, Markus Mottl -- Markus Mottl markus@oefai.at Austrian Research Institute for Artificial Intelligence http://www.oefai.at/~markus ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners