From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.83]) by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A0EAF7EE49 for ; Sat, 14 Sep 2013 13:37:16 +0200 (CEST) Received-SPF: None (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of jon@ffconsultancy.com) identity=pra; client-ip=84.93.230.250; receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="jon@ffconsultancy.com"; x-sender="jon@ffconsultancy.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: None (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of jon@ffconsultancy.com) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=84.93.230.250; receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="jon@ffconsultancy.com"; x-sender="jon@ffconsultancy.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: None (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of postmaster@avasout05.plus.net) identity=helo; client-ip=84.93.230.250; receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="jon@ffconsultancy.com"; x-sender="postmaster@avasout05.plus.net"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AocBADtJNFJUXeb6nGdsb2JhbABbgz+uf5JOgRwWDgEBAQEBBg0JCRQogiUBAQUIAh4SNAsMAQMCCREEAQEBDRoHGQgbCQEJCAIEEwsFAodfAxMIsGUDCok9jQWBJAuBPwcGhBgDjxKHAIMYixKIWIFn X-IPAS-Result: AocBADtJNFJUXeb6nGdsb2JhbABbgz+uf5JOgRwWDgEBAQEBBg0JCRQogiUBAQUIAh4SNAsMAQMCCREEAQEBDRoHGQgbCQEJCAIEEwsFAodfAxMIsGUDCok9jQWBJAuBPwcGhBgDjxKHAIMYixKIWIFn X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.90,903,1371074400"; d="scan'208";a="32863928" Received: from avasout05.plus.net ([84.93.230.250]) by mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 14 Sep 2013 13:37:15 +0200 Received: from XPS ([91.125.250.6]) by avasout05 with smtp id QzdD1m00309223701zdFvg; Sat, 14 Sep 2013 12:37:15 +0100 X-CM-Score: 0.00 X-CNFS-Analysis: v=2.1 cv=VK/kwb/X c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=rKDLt0SBNjd1Eozd8FTbVw==:117 a=rKDLt0SBNjd1Eozd8FTbVw==:17 a=0Bzu9jTXAAAA:8 a=1Pt96-2uaEoA:10 a=Xub9RBUEA-sA:10 a=Kvk-SOs2Z7YA:10 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=r2vSxAw-AAAA:8 a=9YQBA6ZTeLgA:10 a=pGLkceISAAAA:8 a=ZOzjf2MOAAAA:8 a=CjxXgO3LAAAA:8 a=G0aK9_bUvcZf2ThSmZ4A:9 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 a=MSl-tDqOz04A:10 a=d6ZO2ScF64gA:10 X-AUTH: jdh302:2500 Reply-To: From: "Jon Harrop" To: "'Kakadu'" Cc: "'Caml List'" References: <20130910230928.2d51cd39@atmarama.noip.me> <20130911052437.GA9514@notk.org> <20130911101457.3f756b68@atmarama.noip.me> <20130911181737.GA3764@notk.org> <054201ceaf2a$5a0ece10$0e2c6a30$@ffconsultancy.com> <05b701ceafc6$0dab7950$29026bf0$@ffconsultancy.com> <5231D505.2020909@frisch.fr> <00d001ceb0f7$3eb62c20$bc228460$@ffconsultancy.com> In-Reply-To: Date: Sat, 14 Sep 2013 12:37:14 +0100 Organization: Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. Message-ID: <00dd01ceb13e$c35e29e0$4a1a7da0$@ffconsultancy.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQInBeUdAXSiYK4NZW7ZftXe1xVN4QJYzIS+AlTyKkQCSxgGDgH7H0XEAdTRHoYBtKr8ywFDVnX/ATOYrdsCs1yPOQJE8ay7mHUL/qA= Content-Language: en-gb Subject: RE: [Caml-list] OCaml vs Ada and/or GUI options Yes. What is the state of Qt bindings for OCaml these days? Cheers, Jon. -----Original Message----- From: Kakadu [mailto:kakadu.hafanana@gmail.com] Sent: 14 September 2013 08:11 To: jon@ffconsultancy.com Cc: Alain Frisch; Caml List Subject: Re: [Caml-list] OCaml vs Ada and/or GUI options If we seriously talking about OpenGL GUI I should mention that QtQuick already uses OpenGL to render itself. Also, if you are going to write some phone app with OCaml Qt will also be helpful Kaladu On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 7:05 AM, Jon Harrop wrote: > > More the tooling and documentation than the language although there is > some overlap. The OCaml language is good for expressing GUI and > graphical programs. Polymorphic variants are particularly useful. > > I'd say the main challenges are: > > 1. API Exploration: OCamlBrowser is a great little tool but it is much > slower to use to explore a big API (like a GUI toolkit's API) than > Intellisense. > > 2. Libraries: OCaml has mature bindings to GTK but GTK has very > limited support for modern GUI features. For example, vector graphics > are ubiquitous in modern GUIs and GTK punts this to Cairo which > comparable to using the Acorn DRAW file format from BBC BASIC in 1987 > (26 years ago) but without the high-level memory safety that BBC BASIC offered. > > 3. Interoperability: both GTK and Qt punt more advanced (e.g. 3D) > vector graphics to OpenGL but OCaml doesn't have any up-to-date OpenGL bindings. > LablGL is mature but I don't think its bindings to GLU were ever > finished and, of course, it only supports OpenGL circa the turn of the millenium. > Ultimately, the problem is that interoperability is hard with OCaml. > > 4. Samples: There are relatively few OCaml GUI samples out there. > > With tablets reinventing user interface designs, the time is ripe for > a new GUI toolkit, e.g. written in OCaml using OpenGL ES 2.0... > > Cheers, > Jon. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Alain Frisch [mailto:alain@frisch.fr] > Sent: 12 September 2013 15:52 > To: jon@ffconsultancy.com > Cc: caml-list@inria.fr > Subject: Re: [Caml-list] OCaml vs Ada and/or GUI options > > On 09/12/2013 04:40 PM, Jon Harrop wrote: >> OCaml is nowhere near >> having competitive support for basic features required for modern GUI >> programming > > Hi Jon! > > Could you more specific? Are you referring to language features? > > -- Alain > > > -- > Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management and archives: > https://sympa.inria.fr/sympa/arc/caml-list > Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners > Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs