Browse thread
[Caml-list] Completeness of "Unix" run-time library
-
Vasili Galchin
- james woodyatt
-
Richard Jones
-
Shawn Wagner
-
Eric Stokes
-
Vasili Galchin
-
Eric Stokes
-
Vasili Galchin
-
Matt Gushee
-
Richard Jones
-
Nicolas Cannasse
- Diego Olivier Fernandez Pons
- Wolfgang Müller
-
John Carr
-
Richard Jones
-
oliver@f...
-
John Carr
-
Richard Jones
- Jacques Garrigue
- Benjamin Geer
- Michael Vanier
- Sven Luther
-
Richard Jones
- Sven Luther
-
John Carr
-
oliver@f...
-
Richard Jones
-
Nicolas Cannasse
- Shawn Wagner
- Vasili Galchin
- Vasili Galchin
-
Richard Jones
-
Matt Gushee
-
Vasili Galchin
-
Eric Stokes
-
Vasili Galchin
-
Eric Stokes
-
Shawn Wagner
- Stefano Zacchiroli
[
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: | 2004-03-18 (11:23) |
From: | Nicolas Cannasse <warplayer@f...> |
Subject: | Re: OCaml's Cathedral & Bazaar (was Re: [Caml-list] Completeness of "Unix" run-time library) |
> I broadly agree with Matt's analysis of the situation. Here are some > observations of my own. > > (1) Perl gets along quite nicely with a loosely defined and broadly > distributed standard library. However what Perl has which OCaml does > not is a central repository (CPAN) where you can find all those > libraries. I don't just mean find pointers to the libraries (the > Humps), but I mean a place where you can get the actual source. [...] I don't think the main issue is technical. I'm not sure that a CPAN will help OCaml to spread, that it will turns the community into a self organizing decentralized one that makes the power of Perl, Python and other languages out there. OCaml have more social issues. Let's see the facts : A programming language need either a very good community support (so the whole community is helping developping it) or a very good businness backup ( Sun and Java ). OCaml doesn't have any : the community is mainly academic folks that are using OCaml as a (very useful) tool for their research, the INRIA is a centralized system with only small openness to user's contributions - through the wish list for example, neither having a whole team of people working 24/7 at improving the language (they're academics people, they need time to write papers, attend conferences, etc.). Industry adoption of ocaml is in earlier stages, and is not enough wide to push the language as fast as expected from the community. The language itself is still evolving, there is people doing great work on OCaml itself or other librairies, but a lot of OCaml hackers here are feeling quite quickly frustrated with the social interactions, the void of official answers when some important questions are raised, and the unability to simply discuss about what should be added/modified in the standard library. There is several ways of dealing with this : - keep continuing without changing anything, but how much time will Ocaml continue being the best language around ? - try to build librairies with the hope that they'll one time become standard (de facto , or integrated into official release) : that's what we're doing with ExtLib ( http://ocaml-lib.sf.net ) - ask INRIA to open source OCaml ( means : either GPL or recruit language team among community hackers ) - stop writing Ocaml, and switch to another language with better community integration - write your own language, and build your own community :-) One question is : will we get a single official answer to this thread ? Nicolas Cannasse ------------------- 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