Browse thread
[oliver: Re: [Caml-list] OCaml popularity]
- oliver@f...
[
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: | oliver@f... |
| Subject: | [oliver: Re: [Caml-list] OCaml popularity] |
----- Forwarded message from oliver ----- To: Brian Hurt <brian.hurt@qlogic.com> Subject: Re: [Caml-list] OCaml popularity On Wed, Mar 12, 2003 at 05:47:16PM -0600, Brian Hurt wrote: [...] > Having *the* perfect introductory book is actually a detriment, as > it discourages other books from entering the field, thus reducing your > runnning foot total. Likewise, being intuitive or easy to understand is > also a detriment, as this makes both for fewer books and for slimmer > books. Much better to have multi-thousand page tomes (tombs?). And > naturally, you can't measure running feet of web pages :-). Having *NO* such an introductional book, and only high-graded PhD-stuff, would you call this a detriment too? Ciao, Oliver ----- End forwarded message ----- ------------------- 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