From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <marek@xivilization.net>
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 802517EE51
	for <caml-list@sympa.inria.fr>; Sun, 26 May 2013 16:14:50 +0200 (CEST)
Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  marek@xivilization.net) identity=pra; client-ip=178.63.18.39;
  receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="marek@xivilization.net";
  x-sender="marek@xivilization.net";
  x-conformance=sidf_compatible
Received-SPF: Pass (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: domain of
  marek@xivilization.net designates 178.63.18.39 as permitted
  sender) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=178.63.18.39;
  receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="marek@xivilization.net";
  x-sender="marek@xivilization.net";
  x-conformance=sidf_compatible; x-record-type="v=spf1"
Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  postmaster@coaxial.xivilization.net) identity=helo;
  client-ip=178.63.18.39;
  receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="marek@xivilization.net";
  x-sender="postmaster@coaxial.xivilization.net";
  x-conformance=sidf_compatible
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AmQFAN0XolGyPxIn/2dsb2JhbABZgwiDJL8NgQQWdIIjAQEEAToGAQE4BAsLISUPSAYTiAcKqwuEPgEFfowSBo8kg1SXPZFBgxE
X-IPAS-Result: AmQFAN0XolGyPxIn/2dsb2JhbABZgwiDJL8NgQQWdIIjAQEEAToGAQE4BAsLISUPSAYTiAcKqwuEPgEFfowSBo8kg1SXPZFBgxE
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.87,745,1363129200"; 
   d="scan'208";a="15725843"
Received: from coaxial.xivilization.net ([178.63.18.39])
  by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA; 26 May 2013 16:14:49 +0200
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=xivilization.net; s=xiv;
	h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:Mime-Version:References:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:Subject:To:From:Date; bh=0IotO61SY6RCaus6iV8+gx3u3qNPfCuksmHCuF2dmOU=;
	b=bGPFaRWraYbOl4IC9fKMjzMtHuMTSRxU8Ru0biS4tLrV3oGN9fzxHM8fWx8Gf2LdF1Rr65bAkUmKBbPIqE8gRKUHmNDnv2mdKWJj3e8mvvsUhPUno2wM9pjZlMGUYTMk;
Received: from ppp-188-174-116-129.dynamic.mnet-online.de ([188.174.116.129] helo=localhost.localdomain)
	by coaxial.xivilization.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128)
	(Exim 4.80)
	(envelope-from <marek@xivilization.net>)
	id 1Ugbii-00087q-7U
	for caml-list@inria.fr; Sun, 26 May 2013 16:14:48 +0200
Date: Sun, 26 May 2013 16:14:46 +0200
From: Marek Kubica <marek@xivilization.net>
To: "caml-list@inria.fr users" <caml-list@inria.fr>
Message-ID: <20130526161446.5efa45c9@xivilization.net>
In-Reply-To: <20130524231345.GA1923@siouxsie>
References: <CAC3Lx=aj0HxPYvQKpt2yFzcQMXZOc2NKnB56DezQheMHjUPdag@mail.gmail.com>
	<519F1CF6.7050007@riken.jp>
	<20130524143500.GE2007@siouxsie>
	<CAFzMiE19Nk1bU_5Z_CdRNhBiV3W67Ohxjba2eGnMsLXS1uuhcA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAC3Lx=a9zCzBvD0eHRg8SS8D49+dH4hweBsfNwuOKBWf_ETYMA@mail.gmail.com>
	<20130524231345.GA1923@siouxsie>
X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.9.1 (GTK+ 2.24.18; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] French study on security and functional languages

On Sat, 25 May 2013 01:13:45 +0200
oliver <oliver@first.in-berlin.de> wrote:


> I ask, because when looking at the comparison table
> from page 55, then there are other languages that also
> have good results.
> 
> Looks like the type system is the main distinction between
> the well and the bad languages.

Yeah, I think this is a bit overly simplistic to say the more powerful
the type system, the safer the language.

regards,
Marek