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] Threats on future of Camlp4
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: -- (:)
From: Daniel de Rauglaudre <daniel.de_rauglaudre@i...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Threats on future of Camlp4

On Mon, Oct 07, 2002 at 09:21:53AM +0200, Sven LUTHER wrote:

> Daniel, the one problem i have with separating camlp4 from ocaml, is
> that, if i remember well, the standalone camlp4 needed access to the
> ocaml sources to build.

No: Camlp4 is really an independant program. Yes it uses some files of
ocaml, but they are duplicated in the Camlp4 sources (directory

Between parentheses, these copied sources are the OCaml syntax tree,
which are not installed in the OCaml library. I had asked that they
are installed, like are installed some ".h" files, but it has been
refused. However, it would be useful, if people want to create another
preprocessor or use the OCaml syntax tree.

> If we separate again, what will be the situation on this same topic ?
> will you again depend on the ocaml source ? Is there not a cleaner
> solution for this ?

Programs often depend on versions of a compiler, for example with
the associated library.

> And also i am curious, what is so difficult with continuing to release
> camlp4 as part of ocaml, but have a separate CVS tree for developpment,
> that you sync with ocaml from time to time (and probably before each new
> release), in the same way as DRI for example maintains a separate
> development tree from XFree86 ?

I don't know the story of DRI and XFree86. The point is that I refuse
to sync: I consider that the ocaml team is not ready for the
industrialization level, although it pretends, because, at this level,
some "liberty of expression" should be more controlled. It is abnormal
that some member of the team considers that he is free to tell the
industrial contacts that the work of another member is "not serious".

Can you imagine what happens if the second of Microsoft tells to a
customer that Windows is "not serious"? The guy would be dismissed.

I shall return working inside the ocaml directory, if and only if the
ocaml team behave as professionnals.

Another example: I was very shocked, some time ago, that the icon of
Caml Light was "Joe Camel". Very funny, for students, but serious at
industialization level. When I said that, they laughed at me,
telling that I have no sense of humour.

Sorry, 6 millions deaths by cancer of lung EACH YEAR in the world does
not make me laugh. And the free ad of a seller of tobacco is serious
and important. I don't want to be a party to that. Industrials don't
have a "sense of humour", I am sorry. I am absolutely sure that we
have lost customers because of that. Even the name "Caml Light" is
absolutely suspect: students in France are learning it. And some of
them go here to make a thesis, or an a training course and bring their
packets of Camel, that they smoke, and smile at that. Perhaps they
think that we accept them better if they smoke Camels?

Therefore, the ocaml team is not professionnal, I am sorry.

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