From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from weis@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id TAA07981 for caml-redist; Tue, 25 Apr 2000 19:02:26 +0200 (MET DST) 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 WAA08383 for ; Fri, 21 Apr 2000 22:53:57 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from csc-sun.math.utah.edu (csc-sun.math.utah.edu [128.110.198.2]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA16842 for ; Fri, 21 Apr 2000 22:53:47 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from sunblock.math.utah.edu (sunblock.math.utah.edu [155.99.144.57]) by csc-sun.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA26836; Fri, 21 Apr 2000 14:53:42 -0600 (MDT) Received: (from hohn@localhost) by sunblock.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA24905; Fri, 21 Apr 2000 14:53:41 -0600 (MDT) Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2000 14:53:41 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <200004212053.OAA24905@sunblock.math.utah.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: sunblock.math.utah.edu: hohn set sender to hohn@math.utah.edu using -f From: Michael Hohn To: garrigue@kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp CC: caml-list@inria.fr In-reply-to: <20000421094121P.garrigue@kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp> (message from Jacques Garrigue on Fri, 21 Apr 2000 09:41:21 +0900) Subject: Re: When functional languages can be accepted by industry? References: <38FE60E7.5D117555@in.ot.com.au> <20000421094121P.garrigue@kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp> Sender: weis >> ... >> > Vitaly Lugovsky wrote: >> > > >> > > P.S. Maybe, all that we need, is a RAD tool for ocaml? It can >> > > look like a better module finder ("module name" -> "file name" is not >> > > a good idea. Paths in Java is much better), and a lot of reusable >> > > modules for common tasks (database, GUI)... >> >> There are two different problems with RADs >> >> * making one requires lots of work, and is not necessarily very >> rewarding for the author, who himself can probably work >> without. That's the reason you don't find many RADs in the open >> source community. >> You can find an embryo of such a thing in lablgtk for instance, but >> I have no idea whether it will become really a full fledge RAD some >> day. >> >> * it is not so clear how useful it would be for a language like ocaml. >> Code in ocaml is much more compact than in C++ or JAVA, so that code >> generation is not so useful in itself. I agree that this might be >> nice for beginners, but if it is nice for beginners only, then it's >> even harder to find the workforce. >> ... There are some other problems: * RADs usually support just one language, maybe two. But when a project consists of combinations of sh, Python, Maple or Mathematica, ocaml, C/C++ and some Tcl/Tk code, Makefiles are the way to go. * RADs are not programmable. Makefiles can be generated. >> ... >> >> > There already is one: the lablbrowser. It's quite >> > good functionally -- but the interface sucks. >> >> Name has changed, it is now ocamlbrowser. >> As Vitaly answered, this is not a RAD, but more a kind of IDE, more >> centered on library browsing than project building. >> >> As always I admire how constructive your comments are :-) >> >> The interface is that way because I like it that way: >> * the main functionality is in one small window that I can keep on my >> screen all the time. >> * there is one window by module, because I often want to browse >> several modules simultaneously. >> * editor functionality is reduced to a minimum, because real >> programmers use emacs anyway. >> >> ... I agree. Using lablbrowser was quite pleasant, and there are no annoying frills to get in the way. Cheers, Michael