Re: convincing management to switch to Ocaml

From: Dave Mason (dmason@sarg.Ryerson.CA)
Date: Sat Aug 28 1999 - 21:51:42 MET DST

Message-Id: <199908281951.PAA18613@sarg.Ryerson.CA>
To: Andreas Rossberg <>
Subject: Re: convincing management to switch to Ocaml
Date: Sat, 28 Aug 1999 15:51:42 -0400
From: Dave Mason <dmason@sarg.Ryerson.CA>

>>>>> On Fri, 27 Aug 1999 12:00:34 +0200, Andreas Rossberg <> said:

>[many things I agree with!]

> A document defining the language more formally than the user manual
> would definitely be a good thing. If a standard is needed then one
> has to stick to Standard ML for now, I'm afraid.

Would it really be beyond a Master's student working under Xavier (or
other CAML guru) to translate the SML formal spec into a CAML formal
spec? Or at least a PhD student.

I think it would be a Very Good Thing! (And would make the semantic
differences between the languages very explicit.)


This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jan 02 2000 - 11:58:24 MET