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
Re: [Caml-list] Looking for collaborators on a hobby project
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: 2004-05-27 (23:00)
From: szegedy@t...
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Looking for collaborators on a hobby project
Dear Skaller!

I was not aware that you are behind the Felix project.
I really admire your achievments.

Ruby's classes are quite dynamic. There is a great deal of
reflexivity and onw can do a lot of metaprogramming and
nasty tricks like e.g. eval.

I don't plan my language to cope with all Ruby
finesses.  The programmer shoud use the interpreted pass
to do all the dirty hacks, the compiled functions would
would have a much more restricted repertoire.
E.g., I would not allow the user to do evals
in the type-checked part of the code. (Or,
alternatively the eval would be interpreted, but
for the first attempts, I would simply forbid it
together with other nasty features.)

I would not like to do any flow analysis. The main reason
 to use compilation is not performance, but type-safeness.
Today's computers are suitably efficient for most tasks. It's the
programmer's efficiency that should be improved.
(However, performance is still greatly improved over
interpreted Ruby or Python by the described transformations)
It is all mainly about reducing  programming and debugging

I can program faster in Ruby for some tasks. This is mainly
because of the richer and more consistent syntax of Ruby and
its excellent and well designed class library. However as
a project grows, static typing in Ocaml saves me a lot of
debugging time. I would like combine these two different
advantages. Of course, performance should be improved when

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