Version française
Home     About     Download     Resources     Contact us    
Browse thread
Sorted list
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: -- (:)
From: skaller <skaller@u...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Sorted list
On Sat, 2007-08-04 at 17:21 +0100, Richard Jones wrote:

> > Well, I would like to see a community process for selecting,
> > implementing, documenting and maintaining a set of good algorithms
> > which go IN THE STANDARD DISTRIBUTION (under the usual LGPL+X licence,
> > with a disclaimer the code base isn't maintained by Inria, merely
> > distributed on behalf of the community).
> 
> But what's wrong with extlib?  Now I know it's not the "Standard"
> distribution, but that's a mere packaging issue.

A 'mere' packaging issue??? That's the very issue that concerns me.

I think there are other (technical) problems with extlib too:
the iterator design is a bit suspicious, and the implementation
is using Obj.magic without Inria support.

However the packaging issue is the primary problem, for this
and other 3PLs (third party libraries).

My own package requires standard Python, Ocaml, and C++ distros.
That's it. That's already bad enough. The only 3PL's allowed
are provided as source and built by the Felix build system.
On the Ocaml side this includes Dypgen and OCS Scheme.
Extlib couldn't be included this way because it is LGPL.
Felix is FFAU (free for any use modulo propagating copyright
notices).

I carefully avoid 3PL's I can't include as source, and as
many complications -- such as camlp4/5 -- as possible.
[I wish I could use ulex .. but it uses camlp4/5 extensions]
Getting Ocaml to work at all on Windows is hard enough
for clients.

-- 
John Skaller <skaller at users dot sf dot net>
Felix, successor to C++: http://felix.sf.net