English version
Accueil     À propos     Téléchargement     Ressources     Contactez-nous    

Ce site est rarement mis à jour. Pour les informations les plus récentes, rendez-vous sur le nouveau site OCaml à l'adresse ocaml.org.

Browse thread
[Caml-list] OCaml compared as a scripting language
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: 2004-06-15 (17:42)
From: Jon Harrop <jdh30@c...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] OCaml compared as a scripting language
On Tuesday 15 June 2004 18:15, Richard Jones wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 15, 2004 at 06:13:23PM +0200, Bruno.Verlyck@inria.fr wrote:
> > Anyway, all those language comparisons are always biased; is `program
> > length' a good measure of scripting capacity ?  It turns the
> > comparison into a shortest script challenge, doesn't it ?
> Actually it's not a bad measure.  One of the reasons I prefer Perl
> over Java, and OCaml over Perl, is verbosity...

This may be a crazy idea, but is there any formal work on automatically 
factoring higher-order functions out of OCaml programs?

I'm thinking along the lines of a tool which could point out when your code is 
unnecessarily redundant and recommend a common function which could be 
factored out. This seems to be much more interesting in the presence of 

The nearest thing I can think of is in-compiler optimisations like CSE.


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