From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <rixed@happyleptic.org>
Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104])
	by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2A6EC7EE51
	for <caml-list@sympa.inria.fr>; Fri, 24 May 2013 17:15:45 +0200 (CEST)
Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  rixed@happyleptic.org) identity=pra; client-ip=212.27.42.4;
  receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="rixed@happyleptic.org";
  x-sender="rixed@happyleptic.org";
  x-conformance=sidf_compatible
Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  rixed@happyleptic.org) identity=mailfrom;
  client-ip=212.27.42.4;
  receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="rixed@happyleptic.org";
  x-sender="rixed@happyleptic.org";
  x-conformance=sidf_compatible
Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  postmaster@smtp4-g21.free.fr) identity=helo;
  client-ip=212.27.42.4;
  receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="rixed@happyleptic.org";
  x-sender="postmaster@smtp4-g21.free.fr";
  x-conformance=sidf_compatible
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AuABAFODn1HUGyoElGdsb2JhbABZxVQEBAGBBRYOAQEBAQcNCQkUAyWCJAEFOj8QCyETEg8FKCGIJLpMjx0HgnNhA5c6lFI
X-IPAS-Result: AuABAFODn1HUGyoElGdsb2JhbABZxVQEBAGBBRYOAQEBAQcNCQkUAyWCJAEFOj8QCyETEg8FKCGIJLpMjx0HgnNhA5c6lFI
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.87,736,1363129200"; 
   d="scan'208";a="15601460"
Received: from smtp4-g21.free.fr ([212.27.42.4])
  by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 24 May 2013 17:15:44 +0200
Received: from ombreroze.happyleptic.org (unknown [82.229.213.209])
	by smtp4-g21.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id D50DF4C81BB;
	Fri, 24 May 2013 17:15:39 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from rixed by ombreroze.happyleptic.org with local (Exim 4.80)
	(envelope-from <rixed@happyleptic.org>)
	id 1UftiU-0003Un-75; Fri, 24 May 2013 17:15:38 +0200
Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 17:15:38 +0200
From: rixed@happyleptic.org
To: oliver <oliver@first.in-berlin.de>
Cc: caml-list@inria.fr
Message-ID: <20130524151538.GA9915@ombreroze.happyleptic.org>
References: <CAC3Lx=aj0HxPYvQKpt2yFzcQMXZOc2NKnB56DezQheMHjUPdag@mail.gmail.com>
 <519F1CF6.7050007@riken.jp>
 <20130524123551.GA7605@ombreroze.happyleptic.org>
 <20130524144335.GF2007@siouxsie>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20130524144335.GF2007@siouxsie>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] French study on security and functional languages

I agree, and indeed the project I'm currently mostly involved with
closely match your description. I was not blaming specifications per se
but the idea that programming goal is to implement a pre-existing,
fixed, unquestionable set of specifications that stand like revealed
truth.
How these specifications are formulated, how easy it is to fix and
maintain them, is as important as the implementation language IMO.