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 UAA13164; Thu, 21 Mar 2002 20:22:51 +0100 (MET) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id UAA22852 for ; Thu, 21 Mar 2002 20:22:50 +0100 (MET) Received: from wetware.wetware.com (wetware.wetware.com [199.108.16.1]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id g2LJMmT24475; Thu, 21 Mar 2002 20:22:48 +0100 (MET) Received: from kallisti.apple.com(wetware.wetware.com[199.108.16.1]) (2252 bytes) by wetware.wetware.com via sendmail with P:esmtp/R:bind_hosts/T:inet_zone_bind_smtp (sender: ) id for ; Thu, 21 Mar 2002 11:22:47 -0800 (PST) (Smail-3.2.0.114 2001-Aug-6 #1 built 2002-Jan-4) Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 11:22:46 -0800 Subject: Re: [Caml-list] The DLL-hell of O'Caml Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v481) Cc: Jeff Henrikson , caml-list@inria.fr To: Xavier Leroy From: james woodyatt In-Reply-To: <20020321191028.A18937@pauillac.inria.fr> Message-Id: <06AAE760-3D01-11D6-A8FA-000502DB38F5@wetware.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.481) Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk On Thursday, March 21, 2002, at 10:10 AM, Xavier Leroy wrote: > > [...] You're confusing whole programs with libraries. [...] Only=20 > developers (=3D users of third-party libraries) have to deal with code=20= > compatibility issues. I'm a practitioner and not a researcher, so I share many of Mr.=20 Henrikson's concerns, but I think I see your point. Most of my concerns revolve around the problems I expect to face in=20 bundling an application that comprises many little programs that share=20= one or more large libraries. I'd like to see better support for dynamic=20= loading, =E1 la Scaml, but I can see that a policy of "source-only=20 distribution" for libraries between developers is a completely different=20= matter. While the "source-only distribution" policy doesn't put a clamp on my=20 personal plans, I do think that this decision will have to be revisited=20= before Ocaml will make a successful transition from academia into=20 industry. One of the main attractions for industry to the C and Java languages are=20= their crude-yet-functional support for "closed-source distribution" of=20= libraries. Without trying to make a political statement, I would=20 suggest that Ocaml could make a *much* bigger dent in the side of the=20 world, if the Caml team were to reconsider the concerns of industry in=20= this matter. I've already posted my opinion about application packaging systems, but=20= it's not a religious issue for me, so I'll just let it go. -- j h woodyatt ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners