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
[Caml-list] ocaml killer
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: 2004-01-27 (18:19)
From: David Fox <>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] ocaml killer
I would forward this post to some management folks around here if it 
didn't have the subject "ocaml killer"!  :-)

Eric Stokes wrote:

>     Despite a little FUD (and bad English :P) I think this thread has 
> a lot of good ideas in it. After reading it all it seems to me that 
> Ocaml is in a transition period, more and more production oriented 
> programmers are starting to pay serious attention to it. For my case, 
> my organization has decided to migrate to Ocaml as our primary general 
> purpose language. We have invested significant R&D into code written 
> in Ocaml, and have recently launched our first production service 
> written in it.
>     That said, the concerns about libraries, and about a CPAN like 
> repository are very good ones. There is a CPAN like repository for 
> Ocaml (there are several), and while they are in a somewhat embryonic 
> state, they are quite useable. The best example is the Ocaml link 
> database almost all Ocaml libraries 
> eventually get posted there. It is missing some features often 
> associated with CPAN, however the most important feature of such a 
> tool is that it serves as a directory of available libraries. The link 
> database accomplishes this quite well, and serves the community well. 
> GODI is looking to be a more complete CPAN clone for Ocaml, I have not 
> played with it extensively yet, so I can't say too much more. Note 
> also, that C and C++ have no central library repository, and yet they 
> remain the industry standard general purpose languages. On the library 
> side of things, there is a C interface, and a Perl interface, which 
> opens up quite a lot of libraries to use from Ocaml.     However, one 
> of the main benefits of Ocaml is type safety, and using foreign 
> language libraries throws away some of that type safety (the library 
> is free to have grievous errors in it). The primary reason that my 
> organization has switched to Ocaml is that we are under increasing 
> pressure to write highly reliable software. From our point of view all 
> of our libraries must eventually be rewritten in Ocaml, and the sooner 
> the better. I don't think that the pressure we feel is without 
> parallel elsewhere in the industry, so I think that Ocaml has quite a 
> bright future as a production quality general purpose language.
> On Jan 27, 2004, at 1:57 AM, Alexander Epifanov wrote:
>> On 12:41 Tue 27 Jan     , Alexander Danilov wrote:
>>> Alexander Epifanov wrote:
>>>> Hello,
>>>> I have read message about Skala language, and I think (it's only my 
>>>> IMHO),
>>>> that ocaml have no future without some features, like concurrent
>>>> programming
>>>> (CP) and chance to use libraries from the other languages.
>>>> 1) Erlang uses build in CP, but Skala has a library for it, IMHO it 
>>>> would
>>>> be a
>>>> good way for ocaml feature. Thread module isn't enough for 
>>>> effective usage
>>>> of
>>>> CP.
>>> CP is not the main feature. For example, Perl has no good and stable CP
>>> support, but it is very popular.
>>> There are no so many task, that need CP.
>> Maybe. but Thread isn't the best solution.
>>>> 2) No one would use ocaml without libraries, and it's so hard to 
>>>> rewrite
>>>> them
>>>> all in ocaml. external functions aren't enough to use libraries from
>>>> Languages
>>>> like java or c++.
>>>> Are any plans about these two features exists ?
>>>> Thanks.
>>> - here is interesting idea how to make
>>> bindings wuickly. I think it can be implemented in Ocaml,
>>> The language will be preffered in many projects only when it have good
>>> repository of packages, policy of packaging libraries, modules, etc.,
>>> simple mechanism to install this packages over the net and so on. So I
>>> think that for more popularity Ocaml need for something like CPAN
>>> . Thats why I don't use Tcl, Ruby, Ocaml in real
>>> applications. If Ocaml community create packaging policy and network
>>> archive, than number of Ocaml developers will increase much faster.
>> Yes, I can't use _only_ Ocaml for the projects.
>>> Not CP, not multithreading can make programmer happy :), but CPAN can.
>> nice phrase. I agree with you.
>>> P.S.: I know, my English is terrible, I will try to make it better :)
>> My English more terrible, I'm just learning it :)
>> -- 
>> Gentoo Linux
>> -------------------
>> To unsubscribe, mail Archives: 
>> Bug reports: FAQ: 
>> Beginner's list:
> -------------------
> To unsubscribe, mail Archives: 
> Bug reports: FAQ: 
> Beginner's list:

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