Browse thread
[Caml-list] ocaml killer
[
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: | David Fox <david.fox@l...> |
| Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] ocaml killer |
I would forward this post to some management folks around here if it didn't have the subject "ocaml killer"! :-) Eric Stokes wrote: > Despite a little FUD (and bad English :P) I think this thread has > a lot of good ideas in it. After reading it all it seems to me that > Ocaml is in a transition period, more and more production oriented > programmers are starting to pay serious attention to it. For my case, > my organization has decided to migrate to Ocaml as our primary general > purpose language. We have invested significant R&D into code written > in Ocaml, and have recently launched our first production service > written in it. > That said, the concerns about libraries, and about a CPAN like > repository are very good ones. There is a CPAN like repository for > Ocaml (there are several), and while they are in a somewhat embryonic > state, they are quite useable. The best example is the Ocaml link > database http://www.npc.de/ocaml/linkdb/ almost all Ocaml libraries > eventually get posted there. It is missing some features often > associated with CPAN, however the most important feature of such a > tool is that it serves as a directory of available libraries. The link > database accomplishes this quite well, and serves the community well. > GODI is looking to be a more complete CPAN clone for Ocaml, I have not > played with it extensively yet, so I can't say too much more. Note > also, that C and C++ have no central library repository, and yet they > remain the industry standard general purpose languages. On the library > side of things, there is a C interface, and a Perl interface, which > opens up quite a lot of libraries to use from Ocaml. However, one > of the main benefits of Ocaml is type safety, and using foreign > language libraries throws away some of that type safety (the library > is free to have grievous errors in it). The primary reason that my > organization has switched to Ocaml is that we are under increasing > pressure to write highly reliable software. From our point of view all > of our libraries must eventually be rewritten in Ocaml, and the sooner > the better. I don't think that the pressure we feel is without > parallel elsewhere in the industry, so I think that Ocaml has quite a > bright future as a production quality general purpose language. > > On Jan 27, 2004, at 1:57 AM, Alexander Epifanov wrote: > >> On 12:41 Tue 27 Jan , Alexander Danilov wrote: >> >>> Alexander Epifanov wrote: >>> >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> I have read message about Skala language, and I think (it's only my >>>> IMHO), >>>> that ocaml have no future without some features, like concurrent >>>> programming >>>> (CP) and chance to use libraries from the other languages. >>>> >>>> 1) Erlang uses build in CP, but Skala has a library for it, IMHO it >>>> would >>>> be a >>>> good way for ocaml feature. Thread module isn't enough for >>>> effective usage >>>> of >>>> CP. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> CP is not the main feature. For example, Perl has no good and stable CP >>> support, but it is very popular. >>> There are no so many task, that need CP. >> >> Maybe. but Thread isn't the best solution. >> >>> >>>> 2) No one would use ocaml without libraries, and it's so hard to >>>> rewrite >>>> them >>>> all in ocaml. external functions aren't enough to use libraries from >>>> Languages >>>> like java or c++. >>>> >>>> Are any plans about these two features exists ? >>>> >>>> Thanks. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> http://wiki.tcl.tk/critcl - here is interesting idea how to make >>> bindings wuickly. I think it can be implemented in Ocaml, >>> >>> The language will be preffered in many projects only when it have good >>> repository of packages, policy of packaging libraries, modules, etc., >>> simple mechanism to install this packages over the net and so on. So I >>> think that for more popularity Ocaml need for something like CPAN >>> http://www.cpan.org/ . Thats why I don't use Tcl, Ruby, Ocaml in real >>> applications. If Ocaml community create packaging policy and network >>> archive, than number of Ocaml developers will increase much faster. >>> >> Yes, I can't use _only_ Ocaml for the projects. >> >>> Not CP, not multithreading can make programmer happy :), but CPAN can. >> >> nice phrase. I agree with you. >> >>> >>> P.S.: I know, my English is terrible, I will try to make it better :) >> >> My English more terrible, I'm just learning it :) >> >> -- >> Gentoo Linux http://www.gentoo.org >> >> ------------------- >> 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 ------------------- 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