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] [ANN] The Missing Library
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: 2004-04-25 (14:06)
From: skaller <skaller@u...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] [ANN] The Missing Library
On Sun, 2004-04-25 at 22:20, Benjamin Geer wrote:
> james woodyatt wrote:
> > On 23 Apr 2004, at 14:33, John Goerzen wrote:
> >> A plethora of mutually-incompatible modules that duplicate and extend
> >> standard library features is in nobody's interest.  The result will be
> >> an irrelevant standard library and a fragmented development community.
> > 
> > Yeah— that was such a huge roadblock to the popularity of the C language.
> The difficulty of writing portable C or C++ code, given the differences 
> between libraries available on different platforms, has been one of the 
> main reasons for the massive industry shift towards Java in recent years.

Portable C++ is easy to write. The main reason for Java's
success, technically, is as simple as "garbage collection".
The main library reason was the standard GUI.

Portable graphics is impossible without a standard,
Java had it. And as we all know memory management in
C is a nightmare. C++ is vastly superior with
constructors/destructors but garbage collection is
hard to beat for easy memory management :D

However, the 'main' reason for Java's success wasn't
technical. I mean, that woeful crap still doesn't 
have any kind of serious polymorphism. C++ is vastly
superior as a language to Java.

John Skaller,
voice: 061-2-9660-0850, 
snail: PO BOX 401 Glebe NSW 2037 Australia
Checkout the Felix programming language

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