From: "Mattias Waldau" <mattias.waldau@abc.se>
To: <caml-list@inria.fr>
Subject: Good programming languages (Was: Redefinition doesn't work)
Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2000 09:44:11 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <HDEEKOMJILGEIHIMAPCDAEMLDEAA.mattias.waldau@abc.se> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200011021542.QAA07895@pauillac.inria.fr>
>> So better start by saying ``if you want to obtain this effect, you
>> just have to reload the entire program''!
>> Pierre Weis
Sorry, I don't buy your arguments. The most important aspects of a
programming language for me is:
1. typed (to find typo-like bugs, or when changing the program)
2. interactive environment (to be able to test hard part of the program
without have to write elaborate function just for testing)
3. easy to use and understand libraries.
4. good syntax, which makes it easy to write the correct code
5. fast
6. portable, works on windows and linux
7. good support or good open source team
8. cheap
On a scale from 1 to 5, where 5 is the best,
Ocaml would get 5 for typed,
3 for interactive environment (better than C, Java, SML, but much worse than
Lisp, Prolog, Scheme, examples of problem: #relet, not very good
emacs-modes, no object-browser),
2 for easy to use libraries (it is so hard to find the right function, I
have to search thru the PDF-file all the time),
2 for good syntax (it is very easy to spend a lot of time trying to get the
program to compile, for example I called a attribute in a record 'value',
and that works sometimes I have noticed :-),
5 for fast,
5 for portable (when ocamldebug works on windows)
4 for good support (I tried to understand the source code of ocaml, but my
French is to bad.)
5 for cheap
Very good scores for ocaml, but there are places for improvements.
/mattias
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2000-11-03 15:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <200010300739.IAA13016@pauillac.inria.fr>
2000-10-30 23:38 ` Redefinition doesn't work Jaeyoun Chung
2000-10-31 11:06 ` Pierre Weis
2000-10-31 11:52 ` Sven LUTHER
2000-10-31 16:47 ` Pierre Weis
2000-10-31 18:55 ` Stefan Monnier
2000-11-02 15:42 ` Pierre Weis
2000-11-03 3:10 ` Stefan Monnier
2000-11-03 8:44 ` Mattias Waldau [this message]
2000-11-03 15:27 ` Good programming languages (Was: Redefinition doesn't work) bcpierce
2000-11-06 0:17 ` Jacques Garrigue
2000-11-08 18:42 ` Markus Mottl
2000-11-09 16:20 ` Juan J. Quintela
2000-11-10 10:06 ` Markus Mottl
2000-11-13 7:48 ` Stephan Houben
2000-11-10 19:06 ` Remi VANICAT
2000-11-06 6:17 ` Francisco Reyes
2000-11-07 17:36 ` Brian Rogoff
2000-10-31 14:16 ` Redefinition doesn't work Frank Atanassow
2000-10-31 17:07 ` Pierre Weis
2000-10-31 17:26 ` LINUX MANDRAKE -> CAMLTK? mlf
2000-11-02 20:21 ` Pierre Weis
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=HDEEKOMJILGEIHIMAPCDAEMLDEAA.mattias.waldau@abc.se \
--to=mattias.waldau@abc.se \
--cc=caml-list@inria.fr \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox