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
[Caml-list] Possible bug in module and class?
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: 2002-10-22 (02:18)
From: Jacques Garrigue <garrigue@k...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Possible bug in module and class?
From: Alessandro Baretta <>

> I'm using O'Caml in an industrial project. Of course, I'd 
> like to make sure that I give my customers the most stable 
> environment possible. As more and more bugs are found and 
> fixed in the CVS version, the temptation to upgrade from the 
> official distribution becomes stronger. But is the CVS 
> version usually more or less buggy than the official distro?

There is no official guideline that I know, but considering other
problems like binary compatibility, switching to a CVS version can
always create trouble. Personally I would not suggest doing that for
an industrial project, except maybe if the deadline is more than 9
month ahead (i.e. you are reasonnably sure that a new release will be
available by that time).
On the upside, you can profit immediately from bug fixes, and
avoid preemptively bugs that would break your code in an upcoming
release. From this point of view, if you're a very active user, maybe
having the CVS version around for testing can be useful.

Concerning whether there are more or less bugs in the CVS versions,
like for all projects I would say this goes in cycles.
Typically, just after a release people do not immediately introduce
new features, and many bug reports come in, so that for a while the
number of bugs is actually going down.  Then you may get a big change
and it suddenly goes up, then down again thanks to benevolent CVS
Since there is no strict rule about when to commit (except code
freezes just before releases), it is very hard to tell what is the
current situation.
My personnal feeling that the CVS version of a few days ago is
more stable than 3.06, but then I don't test all parts of the

Last thing, for people who might be tempted to use the CVS version:
please do not release code requiring the CVS version to run.  Forcing
it on other people may break their own programs.  But this is just
classical advice I believe.


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