Browse thread
[Caml-list] OCaml popularity
-
Graham Guttocks
- Gerd Stolpmann
- Nicolas Cannasse
- Martin Weber
[
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: | -- (:) |
| From: | Martin Weber <Ephaeton@g...> |
| Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] OCaml popularity |
On Fri, Mar 07, 2003 at 12:27:31PM +1300, Graham Guttocks wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> I discovered OCaml on Doug Bagley's computer shootout page where he
> gives it a rave review over all the other languages he evaluated.
> (...)
Yes, that's where I stumbled over Ocaml for the first time, too ...
> After looking into it further, I'm just surprised that OCaml isn't
> more popular.
I'm not. Exaggerating:
Most programmers are idiots, and idiots won't be able to appreciate
the good things - they take the language which fits their intellectual
base. Still wondering why tons of people program in perl ? :)
> (...)
> Any ideas why OCaml isn't more well known? Is it just because the
> language is not as old as something like Python, or perhaps because
> the syntax is more difficult to learn?
Bluntly, why should Ocaml be known more ? I'm programming in about a
dozen languages, and I don't give a **** about whether the language
is known or not. If it needs a run-time environment and I gotta deliver,
fine, then they gotta install the run-time environment too. As long as
it's not java you're delivering, they can even download it via the 'net
and still live to see it finishing :)
>From all the things I judge a language, its popularity is nothing
I'm looking at. Well, okay, it can serve to amuse me. The popularity
of lisp for example ("lisp is dead" (yeah - as dead as I am)), or that
of perl (@{%$}!!) ...
On the syntax bit, I think it's just sad that ocaml requires different
special operators for different arguments, that's about it which might
drive off new people. (why +. ? Can't 'a + 'a be enough for integer,
bignum, rational, float, string, whatsoEVER addition ? sigh ...).
regards,
-martin
PS: I'm using perl and java myself, so just making sure that you get
that this is no flamebait. If you can't help yourself, cat > /dev/null.
-------------------
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