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=AWL autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15D0FBC6B for ; Thu, 1 Nov 2007 13:47:15 +0100 (CET) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Ao8CADVnKUdQRFuw/2dsb2JhbAA X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.21,358,1188770400"; d="scan'208";a="5348910" Received: from concorde.inria.fr ([192.93.2.39]) by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 01 Nov 2007 13:47:14 +0100 Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id lA1ClEPS011743 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=OK) for ; Thu, 1 Nov 2007 13:47:14 +0100 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Ao8CADVnKUdQRFuw/2dsb2JhbAA X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.21,358,1188770400"; d="scan'208";a="5348908" Received: from furbychan.cocan.org ([80.68.91.176]) by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 01 Nov 2007 13:47:13 +0100 Received: from rich by furbychan.cocan.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1InZRf-0001H3-00; Thu, 01 Nov 2007 12:46:47 +0000 Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 12:46:46 +0000 To: skaller Cc: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Google trends Message-ID: <20071101124645.GA719@furbychan.cocan.org> References: <200711010102.39348.jon@ffconsultancy.com> <20071101094629.GA28190@furbychan.cocan.org> <1193918424.6008.2.camel@rosella.wigram> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1193918424.6008.2.camel@rosella.wigram> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) From: Richard Jones X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 4729CAD2.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail . ensmp . fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; non-trivial:01 cathedral:98 supplier:98 wrote:01 compilers:01 caml-list:01 let:03 thu:05 fork:05 anyway:05 shared:06 red:92 source:12 happens:13 should:13 On Thu, Nov 01, 2007 at 11:00:24PM +1100, skaller wrote: > No they couldn't. The Cathedral would never let them. Ridiculous - they could have done a friendly fork of the code. Code could have been shared both ways between the OCaml-on-dot-Net and the OCaml-native compilers. They chose _not_ to do that. Anyway, I hope that people considering F# keep in mind what happens should Microsoft lose interest in it and decide not to continue supplying or supporting it. It's crazy to choose a language for any non-trivial program unless that language is either standardised with multiple independent vendors, or (better still) open source so you have options if your supplier stops supporting it. Rich. -- Richard Jones Red Hat