Version française
Home     About     Download     Resources     Contact us    

This site is updated infrequently. For up-to-date information, please visit the new OCaml website at

Browse thread
RE: [Caml-list] OCaml growing pains
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: -- (:)
From: Anil Madhavapeddy <anil@r...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] OCaml growing pains
On Thu, Aug 12, 2004 at 01:48:38PM -0700, Brandon J. Van Every wrote:
> Living a stone's throw from Microsoft as I do, and often wishing for a
> stone, I am ROTFLMAO at what you say.  The book of Microsoft states that
> knowing everything about a technology is clearly not necessary to market
> it.  When OCaml has the popularity of C# or Windows, we'll talk about
> what evangelist qualities led to that.  Meanwhile, you should realize
> that the people who are best at excruciating technical detail are the
> worst evangelists, because they aren't interested in being accessible to
> anyone who doesn't meet their high standards of technical content.

How terribly rude.  I sent you a private mail to avoid spamming the
list with yet more crap, and you forward it back here.  In fact, I'm 
starting to be convinced that you're some kind of surreal troll, given
your stunning lack of ability to shut up and write code.

I took out an amusing five minutes to google for 'brandon j. van every'
to see if I could find any MIT-licensed free code written by you, and
unfortunately failed to come up with a single hit.  It was drowned out
by your numerous posts to various lists asking the same repetetive 
questions so familiar to this list.

My personal highlights from the google results include:

I found reference to the 'free3d' library.  However, it was GPLed
(tsk tsk, how can I make money from it??!) and not available anywhere.

> Which is what actually happens.  You aren't getting ML S*attle announces
> *and* whining, there'd be no reason for it if the announces actually
> went through.  I tried again last night and still haven't managed it.
> Maybe a very large code snippet would do the trick.

I wonder if this post will get through the filters given its "meta"
nature (some might describe it as "irrelevant").  I hope it doesn't ;-)

Anil Madhavapeddy                       
University of Cambridge                

To unsubscribe, mail Archives:
Bug reports: FAQ:
Beginner's list: