Browse thread
"OCaml gives you only monomorphic methods in classes."
[
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: | -- (:) |
| From: | brogoff <brogoff@s...> |
| Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] "OCaml gives you only monomorphic methods in classes." |
On Sat, 29 Dec 2007, Jon Harrop wrote: > On Saturday 29 December 2007 06:30:48 brogoff wrote: > > What's the date that quote was made? > > Yesterday, by the professor heading the group at Lausanne who are developing > one of the most widely touted modern statically-typed functional programming > languages (Scala). Then Dr. Odersky and his listeners would be well served by a polite correction. As Scala has been changing rapidly over the past year, he surely understands that comments made on a 2 year old version of Scala (Scala lacks lazy values, and structural typing, and existential types, and...) don't reflect the current state of the language. Other than that, I wouldn't let such comments deter me from investing time in the language. If it does what I want (interoperate with the JVM and Java) then what the users believe about OCaml is hardly relevant. -- Brian