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=0.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 Received: from mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.105]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id B620EBC69 for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2008 14:09:21 +0100 (CET) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Aq4HAMLhjkdDWxLC/2dsb2JhbACBWKxY X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.24,301,1196636400"; d="scan'208";a="21414726" Received: from ip67-91-18-194.z18-91-67.customer.algx.net (HELO server1.bertec.net) ([67.91.18.194]) by mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 17 Jan 2008 14:09:21 +0100 Received: from kuba.bertec.net (kuba.bertec.net [192.168.2.16]) by server1.bertec.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F61CCDFE9 for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2008 08:09:19 -0500 (EST) From: Kuba Ober To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Re: Hash clash in polymorphic variants Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 08:09:17 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.6 (enterprise 0.20071123.740460) References: <627467.86096.qm@web54605.mail.re2.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <627467.86096.qm@web54605.mail.re2.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200801170809.18163.ober.14@osu.edu> X-Spam: no; 0.00; hash:01 variants:01 bindings:01 bindings:01 ocaml:01 ocaml:01 hacked:01 cheers:01 polymorphic:01 imho:01 caml-list:01 library:03 apps:04 generated:05 perhaps:05 > > Using Qt with some machine (or not!) generated bindings is just a huge > > waste -- it's a nice, clean design, which has recently been tweaked for > > performance (some Qt4 apps start in 50% of the time just by having been > > ported to Qt4 from Qt3). > > I'm inclined to agree. I would even go as far as saying that the lack of > Qt bindings is perhaps the biggest open sore as far as Ocaml library > support is concerned. > > The guys at Trolltech, however, seem quite keen on having Qt on as many > platforms as possible (Qt-Jambi, which brings Qt to the JVM is one of their > products). Couldn't this whole auto-generation of bindings be made easier > if they got involved? At some point, in order to "naturally" use Qt and benefit from its performance, the machine translation will be easier than any bindings you could think of. IMHO, of course. Qt's code itself will become smaller in Ocaml - I've hacked at porting QObject, and so far I've got the line count to 50% of Trolltech's. And I'm a total noob. Cheers, Kuba