English version
Accueil     Ŕ propos     Téléchargement     Ressources     Contactez-nous    

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

Browse thread
OSR - "Batteries included" - Standardizing syntax extensions and extra libraries
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: 2008-03-05 (14:03)
From: Dario Teixeira <darioteixeira@y...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] OSR - "Batteries included" - Standardizing syntax extensions and extra libraries

> I think ocamlfind basically solves the technical aspect of this 
> OCaml-OSR distribution (although if you are ready to add .cma or -pp 
> flags explicitly, just installing all the selected libraries together in 
> the same directory as OCaml stdlib would also work).

Indeed.  Personally, I see little technical need for ocamlcs.  With built-in
support for Findlib in Ocamlbuild and properly constructed META files, using
any syntax extension (even if the extension depended on other extensions or
libraries) could be achieved with a simple entry in a _tags file.

> But of course, the real issues with an extended distribution are not 
> technical. Btw, there has already been an attempt to maintain such a 
> distribution several years ago (Google for "Caml Development Kit"). It 
> might be wise to look at the reasons why it is no longer active.

You are quite right.  Moreover, considering that technically the advantage
of ocamlcs over plain Ocamlbuild+Findlib is not that great, I also think
that managing ocamlcs might be too much trouble for very little benefit.

This of course does not invalidate the original intention of this OSR:
we do need to simplify the use of syntax extensions.  However, Ocaml won't
need to include batteries if getting them is as simple as pushing a button.

Dario Teixeira

Yahoo! Answers - Got a question? Someone out there knows the answer. Try it