[Fwd: [Caml-list] OCaml popularity]

["sebastien FURIC" <sebastien.furic@tni-valiosys.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 40 bytes --]

 Sorry, I forgot the list...

 Sebastien

[-- Attachment #2: Type: message/rfc822, Size: 1200 bytes --]

From: "Sébastien Furic" <sebastien.furic@tni.fr>
To: Pierre Weis <pierre.weis@inria.fr>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] OCaml popularity
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 11:44:53 +0100
Message-ID: <3E6DBE25.25F38749@tni.fr>

 Hi,

Pierre Weis a écrit :
<snip>
> 
> You are also right: this language has to be taught before being
> profitably used. The darker side of this fact is that conversely, you
> have to learn it. This may be the main drawback of Objective Caml:
> there is no ``Objective Caml for dummies''. That may be the price to
> pay to use a powerful and theoretically well-founded language.
> 
<snip>

 Some attempts are made in Haskell in order to return more comprehensive
error reports for beginners. Helium may be a good source of inspiration
for a "beginners-only" ocaml compiler:
 http://www.cs.uu.nl/~afie/helium/
 IMHO, syntactic aspects could be handled by an instance of ocamlp4. But
what about the rest ?

 Cheers,

 Sebastien