From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 Received: from mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.82]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 888E2BC6B for ; Fri, 9 Nov 2007 23:09:03 +0100 (CET) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgAAAIZpNEfC2fJXnmdsb2JhbACPAgIBAQcCCBEY X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.21,397,1188770400"; d="scan'208";a="4258319" Received: from anchor-post-37.mail.demon.net ([194.217.242.87]) by mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 09 Nov 2007 23:09:03 +0100 Received: from [80.177.38.218] (helo=orion.metastack.com) by anchor-post-37.mail.demon.net with esmtp (Exim 4.68) id 1Iqc2A-0005Tx-Ok for caml-list@yquem.inria.fr; Fri, 09 Nov 2007 22:09:02 +0000 Received: from countertenor (p508162F0.dip.t-dialin.net [80.129.98.240]) (authenticated bits=0) by orion.metastack.com (8.13.4/8.13.3) with ESMTP id lA9M5Jtb019485 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Fri, 9 Nov 2007 22:05:22 GMT From: "David Allsopp" To: References: <634971.24746.qm@web54601.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <4a051d930711090738n3d1bac35re0a1d754f4fe8c47@mail.gmail.com> Subject: RE: [Caml-list] O'Caml vs OCaml (was: A sound semantics for OCaml light) Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2007 23:08:57 +0100 Organization: MetaStack Solutions Ltd. Message-ID: <004d01c8231d$22ea66f0$017ca8c0@countertenor> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 Thread-Index: Acgi5iNLsQ8fAmdAQsOoKsBaUexVtQAAWJEw X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 In-Reply-To: <4a051d930711090738n3d1bac35re0a1d754f4fe8c47@mail.gmail.com> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.63 on 172.16.28.218 X-Spam: no; 0.00; o'caml:01 ocaml:01 semantics:01 ocaml:01 o'caml:01 gerd:01 wikipedia:01 wiki:01 irish:98 breathing:98 radar:98 irish:98 faq:01 caml-list:01 grep:01 > 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/