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=1.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE, DNS_FROM_RFC_WHOIS autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 Received: from mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.83]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3FB9BC69 for ; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 16:02:55 +0100 (CET) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgAAALWrjUfOvjGvoWdsb2JhbACQFgIBAQcEBhEBF51G X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.24,293,1196636400"; d="scan'208";a="6128060" Received: from web54605.mail.re2.yahoo.com ([206.190.49.175]) by mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with SMTP; 16 Jan 2008 16:02:55 +0100 Received: (qmail 86216 invoked by uid 60001); 16 Jan 2008 15:02:54 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-ID; b=4Cyr7zbCrurzbjeZZPD59Q9VJy9skdLmPRG/aowQnM72rZH9piv+xPmmWWy9/LjR2+H4L+Q/Fc5Zl8NAvSZ6icl/I0xD6RXrzHdRi+z9sm5Fto4xbuqSGLnARhx9UfOuh7e2BQ3OG+z8/uC6SPbBLVZhzGTwxeeMUFpY0VDSBAk=; X-YMail-OSG: xi0rdG0VM1lPNR8eIvUlVj94.gAQzro5LJX632.fzR0BMGmyd0a5AtwcUQNjNuapvd2o.VjfJHqyzHIrzIhBU6WJU2MRywkPcegpUf.ErcqmRLnBAhsezlmDjawXuQ-- Received: from [82.155.114.118] by web54605.mail.re2.yahoo.com via HTTP; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:02:54 GMT Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:02:54 +0000 (GMT) From: Dario Teixeira Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Re: Hash clash in polymorphic variants To: Kuba Ober , caml-list@yquem.inria.fr In-Reply-To: <200801160848.14280.ober.14@osu.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-ID: <627467.86096.qm@web54605.mail.re2.yahoo.com> X-Spam: no; 0.00; hash:01 variants:01 ocaml:01 ocaml:01 bindings:01 bindings:01 kde:01 cheers:01 richest:98 polymorphic:01 caml-list:01 native:03 seems:03 library:03 commit:03 Hi, > In fact, after some initial thinking and looking around it seems that the > only "sane" GUI for OCaml, at this time, is Qt, but someone has to write a > machine translator to port it from C++ to OCaml. Qt is reasonably well > designed, and has the richest feature set of all GUI toolkits, even if you > combined all the competition and treated it as one "other" toolkit. > > 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? I am sure they already have plenty of tools in place to facilitate it. Even if they were not to commit actual manpower to the effort, they might still be able to help. And incidentally, the afore mentioned Qt-Jambi, together with the Ocamljava project might provide a last-resort solution in the absence of native bindings. Another possibility might be the Qyoto/Kimono project (which brings Qt/KDE into .net) together with the OcamlIL project (if it's still alive). You would then use Mono to run Ocaml programmes. cheers, Dario __________________________________________________________ Sent from Yahoo! Mail - a smarter inbox http://uk.mail.yahoo.com