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 IAA14270; Fri, 9 Apr 2004 08:41:45 +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 IAA14222 for ; Fri, 9 Apr 2004 08:41:44 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from smtp3.adl2.internode.on.net (smtp3.adl2.internode.on.net [203.16.214.203]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i396gZjq010310 for ; Fri, 9 Apr 2004 08:42:37 +0200 Received: from [192.168.1.200] (ppp116-94.lns1.syd2.internode.on.net [150.101.116.94]) by smtp3.adl2.internode.on.net (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i396fZvM092763; Fri, 9 Apr 2004 16:11:36 +0930 (CST) Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Dynamically evaluating OCaml code From: skaller Reply-To: skaller@users.sourceforge.net To: John Goerzen Cc: Ocaml Mailing List In-Reply-To: <20040408173535.GA1291@excelhustler.com> References: <20020104004356.GA1672@mev> <20040408133727.GC29195@excelhustler.com> <20040408145606.GA18473@fichte.ai.univie.ac.at> <20040408153056.GB30763@excelhustler.com> <20040408164404.GA19556@fichte.ai.univie.ac.at> <20040408173535.GA1291@excelhustler.com> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1081492894.20677.107.camel@pelican> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.2 (1.2.2-4) Date: 09 Apr 2004 16:41:35 +1000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Miltered: at nez-perce by Joe's j-chkmail ("http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr")! X-Loop: caml-list@inria.fr X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 dynamically:01 sourceforge:01 2004:99 ocamlopt:01 licencing:01 retrieval:99 distro:01 9660:01 glebe:01 ocaml:01 nsw:01 snail:02 makefile:02 complexity:02 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk X-Keywords: X-UID: 196 On Fri, 2004-04-09 at 03:35, John Goerzen wrote: > Yes. That would make sense for a lot of things. The Humps are already > fairly usable for finding things, but installing them can be a different > matter. > > I have to think twice before using things not in the standard library > for code that others will run because I must consider the complexity of > setting them up. Some libraries don't compile out of the box on systems > that lack ocamlopt; others require various amounts of Makefile hacking > to see correct paths, etc. With this I agree entirely. My policy is "NO THIRD PARTY LIBRARIES". I'm quite happy to build and install them for my own use but I can't figure a way to simultaneously redistribute them, whilst at the same time not having to be responsible for maintaining them (quite apart from licencing issues). Guess I'd be happy to use 3PL's when the packaging/retrieval mechanism (such as GODI) was itself part of the standard distro. -- John Skaller, mailto:skaller@users.sf.net voice: 061-2-9660-0850, snail: PO BOX 401 Glebe NSW 2037 Australia Checkout the Felix programming language http://felix.sf.net ------------------- 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