From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id AAA31820; Sat, 9 Jun 2001 00:08:39 +0200 (MET DST) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id AAA31867 for ; Sat, 9 Jun 2001 00:08:37 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from mail1.svr.pol.co.uk (mail1.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.193.18]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f58M8bL26870 for ; Sat, 9 Jun 2001 00:08:37 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from modem-107.lead.dialup.pol.co.uk ([62.136.60.235] helo=baby) by mail1.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.13 #0) id 158UQd-0006uE-00; Fri, 08 Jun 2001 23:08:28 +0100 Message-ID: <001c01c0f068$ce193f40$a00bfea9@baby> From: "Jonathan Coupe" To: "Miles Egan" Cc: , References: <20010607015821.B11344@jean> <002c01c0ef7f$e154f3e0$5d26883e@baby> <20010608024102.A13672@jean> <003601c0f016$7ac12940$a00bfea9@baby> <4.3.2.7.2.20010608131019.03c8c840@shell16.ba.best.com> <20010608133117.A28472@caddr.com> Subject: Re: [Caml-list] ocaml complexity Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2001 23:17:26 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk > On Fri, Jun 08, 2001 at 01:22:44PM -0700, Chris Hecker wrote: > > > > Do people actually see the current "market penetration" of ocaml as a problem? > > One big problem would be if INRIA didn't think it was popular enough to > > continue funding it, but anything short of that is not disasterous. We might > > get more libraries and whatnot with more people, but there would be downsides > > to more popularity as well. > > I certainly don't think Ocaml's popularity or lack thereof is a problem and I > agree there advantages in letting it grow at its own pace. I'm mainly > interested in increasing its market penetration where I work so I can stop > writing Python code. > > -- > miles > Is Ocaml's acceptability at Pixar independent of its use in the larger marketplace? If so, I'm surprised. (I believed that the opposite was the case for Lisp, from your comments on cll.) The more people who use a language, the more useful it is through the availability of tools, libraries and trained programmers. And yes, the more politically acceptable it is to decision makers. Which is fair enough - what if INRIA does stop supporting Caml? There's also the larger question of our professional responsibility to society. Software quality is a key (though usual buried) problem for the modern world. Tools that can improve it are good. Ocaml has significant potential to do that. I'd hate to see it under used to the extent that CLOS and Smalltalk are. Jonathan ------------------- Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr