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 (16:15)
From: Bruno.Verlyck@i...
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] OCaml compared as a scripting language
   Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 08:40:46 +0200
   From: Florian Hars <hars@bik-gmbh.de>

   Richard Jones wrote:
   > I think it'd be possible to assemble a very capable scripting
   > language without affecting the core language at all.
   Isn't this what cash is about (minus the regexp stuff and the camlp4 sugar)?
Yes, that was my intent.
Thanks for the hype!

Now that I'm at it...

On Mon, 14 Jun 2004, Richard Jones wrote:
> It may interest people to know that OCaml was compared to other computer
> languages for scripting:
>  http://merd.sourceforge.net/pixel/language-study/scripting-language/
> It comes out somewhere in the middle.
Of course Cash would score somewhat higher than OCaml, if only because
it can get the script on the command line :-).

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 ?


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