RE: [Caml-list] O'Caml vs OCaml (was: A sound semantics for OCaml light)

["David Allsopp" <dra-news@metastack.com>]

> I think we as a community can agree that it is and always has been
> OCaml, not O'Caml [1,2]. But that's not going to prevent a great
> number of people from making the mistake. :-( I wonder if the folks at
> INRIA gave any thought to the "Irish interpretation"? (I'm quite sure
> the O'Haskell people did.)

With all due respect, but your first statement is refuted in your second
reference! I, as a very minimal example, would generally refer to it as
O'Caml, though occasionally mistype it (in a rush) - Gerd, for example, has
called it O'Caml today - though after your post his next one changed style!

The reference on the Inria site seems to clarify OCAML vs OCaml, not O'Caml
vs OCaml and if you grep recent list postings, you'll see a right old mix of
it: so possibly we don't agree!

Linguistically, it is acceptable for an acronym to become a word in its
right after long term adoption: for example, Laser (Light Amplification by
Stimulated Emission of Radiation), Sonar (SOund Navigation And Ranging),
Scuba (Self-Contained Underwater Breathing Apparatus) & Radar (RAdio
Detection And Ranging).

Hence CAML = Caml

For the sake of pedantry, the Irish spelling is in fact the more accurate
because O'Caml is the contraction of two words and the apostrophe should be
used to denote the missing letters in the contraction (cf. isn't, don't).

Hence Objective CAML = O'Caml

QED :o)

I fervently promise not air such pedantry on this list again...


David


> [1] http://caml.inria.fr/resources/doc/faq/general.en.html#name-case
> [2]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Objective_Caml#.22Ocaml.22_to_.22O.27Caml_
programming_language.22_move
> [3] http://www.cs.chalmers.se/~nordland/ohaskell/