On 12/16/2011 07:39 AM, Alain Frisch wrote:
We don't necessarily need a full-blown packaging system, with dependency
tracking, versioning, automatic download, etc.
At first, maybe. In the long run, any friction in the system of
inter-package dependencies grinds away at the composability of OC
Am Freitag, den 16.12.2011, 15:11 +0100 schrieb Alain Frisch:
> On 12/16/2011 02:14 PM, Gerd Stolpmann wrote:
> > Simple answer: There is a bootstrap problem: The existing Ocaml users
> > are almost Unix-only. They do not care about Windows. In order to
> > establish "Windows-typical problem solvin
On 12/16/2011 02:14 PM, Gerd Stolpmann wrote:
Simple answer: There is a bootstrap problem: The existing Ocaml users
are almost Unix-only. They do not care about Windows. In order to
establish "Windows-typical problem solving" you need definitely more
Windows users, but they will only come if you
Le 16/12/2011 13:39, Alain Frisch a écrit :
> 3. Binary packages are not created by casual users. It's not crazy to
> require, at least in the short term, a decent Unix-like environment
> (which includes a C compiler) in order to compile the libraries and
> create the binary packages. It would be n
Am Freitag, den 16.12.2011, 13:39 +0100 schrieb Alain Frisch:
> On 12/14/2011 06:36 PM, Gerd Stolpmann wrote:
> > I know, and this makes me quite optimistic that it is not that hard to
> > develop standalone executables for the frequently used Unix utilities.
>
> It's amazing how a discussion abou
On Fri 16 Dec 2011 01:39:19 PM CET, Alain Frisch wrote:
A few points:
1. It would be useful to have a completely standalone binary
distribution of ocaml (with ocamlopt) under Windows. This can be
achieved either with little development efforts by extracting the
minimal needed subset of an mi
On 12/14/2011 06:36 PM, Gerd Stolpmann wrote:
I know, and this makes me quite optimistic that it is not that hard to
develop standalone executables for the frequently used Unix utilities.
It's amazing how a discussion about simplifying the life for Windows
users ends up with "let's emulate Uni
On 14/12/2011, Alain Frisch wrote:
> On 12/14/2011 04:49 PM, Adrien wrote:
>> But windows actually has symlinks. Kind of. Starting with Vista and the
>> corresponding NTFS version. But by default you need to be an administrator
>> to use them, you can only create a limited number of symlink in a g
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 12:47 PM, Adrien wrote:
> On 15/12/2011, Martin DeMello wrote:
>>
>> This seems better-maintained:
>>
>> https://github.com/bmatzelle/gow/wiki
>>
>> At the very least it would be a good starting point.
>
> I had never heard of that one before and asked people about it. It
On 15/12/2011, Martin DeMello wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 2:29 AM, Adrien wrote:
>> On 14/12/2011, David Allsopp wrote:
>>>
>>> Any particular reason why the GnuWin32 project doesn't already fulfil
>>> this
>>> requirement (http://gnuwin32.sourceforge.net/)?
>>
>> It's not maintained well a
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 2:29 AM, Adrien wrote:
> On 14/12/2011, David Allsopp wrote:
>>
>> Any particular reason why the GnuWin32 project doesn't already fulfil this
>> requirement (http://gnuwin32.sourceforge.net/)?
>
> It's not maintained well and it's often quite dirty.
This seems better-main
Am Mittwoch, den 14.12.2011, 19:41 + schrieb David Allsopp:
> Gerd Stolpmann wrote:
> > Am Mittwoch, den 14.12.2011, 09:27 -0800 schrieb Aleksey Nogin:
> > > On 14.12.2011 04:52, Gerd Stolpmann wrote:
> > >
> > > > I don't think you will be able to convince everybody - at this point
> > > > the
On 14/12/2011, Alain Frisch wrote:
> On 12/14/2011 02:37 PM, Adrien wrote:
>> I don't think it would be possible to live without a C toolchain simply
>> because we use C libraries all the time.
>
> It depends on who is "we". I can imagine that library developers still
> need a C toolchain but rele
On 14/12/2011, David Allsopp wrote:
> Gerd Stolpmann wrote:
>> Am Mittwoch, den 14.12.2011, 09:27 -0800 schrieb Aleksey Nogin:
>> > On 14.12.2011 04:52, Gerd Stolpmann wrote:
>> >
>> > > I don't think you will be able to convince everybody - at this point
>> > > the issue becomes political in some
On 15/12/2011, Martin DeMello wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 4:52 AM, Gerd Stolpmann
> wrote:
>>
>> There could be an alternative: The "busybox approach". We could develop
>> a toolkit that covers all the Unix commands we need for the existing
>> build scripts. It would include easy things like
On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 4:52 AM, Gerd Stolpmann wrote:
>
> There could be an alternative: The "busybox approach". We could develop
> a toolkit that covers all the Unix commands we need for the existing
> build scripts. It would include easy things like cp, mv etc., but also a
> classic "make" (med
On Dec 14, 2011, at 17:55 , Alain Frisch wrote:
>> I'm quite interested in the ability to create .cmxs files without a C
>> compiler and can already picture me using it. I've also noticed Benedikt's
>> ocamlnat work. Would it be usable to script native-code applications?
>> Maybe with less requir
Gerd Stolpmann wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, den 14.12.2011, 09:27 -0800 schrieb Aleksey Nogin:
> > On 14.12.2011 04:52, Gerd Stolpmann wrote:
> >
> > > I don't think you will be able to convince everybody - at this point
> > > the issue becomes political in some sense: Do we want to give up our
> > > Unix
> Note that to a degree, OMake already provides the ability to do
> Unix-style things under Windows.
I won't wish you ever hear the words I've said while porting
OMake on mingw. If you want a polite response, please take
a look at
http://overbld.hg.sourceforge.net/hgweb/overbld/overbld/file/tip
Am Mittwoch, den 14.12.2011, 09:27 -0800 schrieb Aleksey Nogin:
> On 14.12.2011 04:52, Gerd Stolpmann wrote:
>
> > I don't think you will be able to convince everybody - at this point the
> > issue becomes political in some sense: Do we want to give up our Unix
> > habits just to support an OS we
On 14.12.2011 04:52, Gerd Stolpmann wrote:
> I don't think you will be able to convince everybody - at this point the
> issue becomes political in some sense: Do we want to give up our Unix
> habits just to support an OS we (often enough) do not like, and would
> only cover to get more love from t
On 12/14/2011 04:49 PM, Adrien wrote:
Hmmm, right. But if /usr/bin/gcc is already a symlink, ocaml wouldn't be
able to use it at all... I find it quite weird but I don't have a cygwin box
to test.
Well, that's precisely the point: the natural way to use gcc 3 under
Cygwin is through symlinks i
On 12/14/2011 02:37 PM, Adrien wrote:
Actually, I think that you should have used the "/etc/alternatives"
symlinks: /usr/bin/gcc points to /etc/alternatives/FOO and you can make this
FOO symlink point to the /usr/bin/BAR binary that you want.
The problem is that flexlink.exe (and ocamlopt.exe)
A solution that I used is to patch OCaml to read a configuration file at
startup. This configuration file overrides what was put in the config at
compile time, so that you can change what C compiler/assembler/linker
you use at every execution. It was done in a first attempt to build a
cross-compili
On 14/12/2011, Gerd Stolpmann wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, den 14.12.2011, 14:37 +0100 schrieb Adrien:
>> On 14/12/2011, Alain Frisch wrote:
>> > As a concrete problem, until a few days ago, the mingw port could not be
>> > used with recent versions of Cygwin without some small hacks (like
>> > copying
;
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Some comments on recent discussions
Am Mittwoch, den 14.12.2011, 14:37 +0100 schrieb Adrien:
> On 14/12/2011, Alain Frisch wrote:
> > On 12/13/2011 10:53 AM, Adrien wrote:
> >> On 13/12/2011, Alain Frisch wrote:
> >>> As Xavier said, it would
Am Mittwoch, den 14.12.2011, 14:37 +0100 schrieb Adrien:
> On 14/12/2011, Alain Frisch wrote:
> > On 12/13/2011 10:53 AM, Adrien wrote:
> >> On 13/12/2011, Alain Frisch wrote:
> >>> As Xavier said, it would be great to find someone who'd like to join the
> >>> core dev team in order to improve su
>
> As for the build systems, I'd advise everyone to use OASIS instead of
> custom
> systems: it's not perfect on windows but for cairo2 and archimedes, I think
> I only had to change paths from backward-slashes to forward-slashes in
> setup.data (or the other way round) (took 15 seconds).
>
A cla
On 14/12/2011, Alain Frisch wrote:
> On 12/13/2011 10:53 AM, Adrien wrote:
>> On 13/12/2011, Alain Frisch wrote:
>>> As Xavier said, it would be great to find someone who'd like to join the
>>> core dev team in order to improve support for Windows. Anyone interested?
>>
>> In my experience, OCaml
My feeling is that the core issue lies in the fact that we want two
different styles: the Unix environment, and the Windows way.
- The first one, imho, currently very well served by the cygwin
environment + official ocaml package for cygwin.
- The second one would be best served by an installer t
Am Mittwoch, den 14.12.2011, 07:03 +0100 schrieb Alain Frisch:
> On 12/13/2011 10:53 AM, Adrien wrote:
> > On 13/12/2011, Alain Frisch wrote:
> >> As Xavier said, it would be great to find someone who'd like to join the
> >> core dev team in order to improve support for Windows. Anyone interested?
On 12/14/2011 10:34 AM, Jonathan Protzenko wrote:
For the native compiler, we need an external toolchain, but this is
not a huge issue. With some little amount of work, one could support a
standalone msys/mingw (as opposed to mingw compilers packaged in Cygwin)
This is precisely what http://prot
On 12/14/2011 07:03 AM, Alain Frisch wrote:
On 12/13/2011 10:53 AM, Adrien wrote:
On 13/12/2011, Alain Frisch wrote:
As Xavier said, it would be great to find someone who'd like to join
the
core dev team in order to improve support for Windows. Anyone
interested?
In my experience, OCaml is
On 12/13/2011 10:53 AM, Adrien wrote:
On 13/12/2011, Alain Frisch wrote:
As Xavier said, it would be great to find someone who'd like to join the
core dev team in order to improve support for Windows. Anyone interested?
In my experience, OCaml is working mostly fine on Windows. I can see
some
On 12/13/2011 10:15 AM, Gaius Hammond wrote:
I suspect that all the OCaml-on-Windows enthusiasts find their needs met by F#.
Maybe interoperability between OCaml and F# is the way to go on Windows.
Do you mean source-level compatibility between the two languages? I'm
afraid they are too diff
Adrien wrote:
> On 13/12/2011, Alain Frisch wrote:
> > As Xavier said, it would be great to find someone who'd like to join
> > the core dev team in order to improve support for Windows. Anyone
> interested?
>
> In my experience, OCaml is working mostly fine on Windows. I can see some
> issues bu
On Sat, Dec 10, 2011 at 05:32:45PM -0300, Andrei Formiga wrote:
[...]
> Regarding documentation, this is a problem in many fronts, beginning
> with the book situation. Practical OCaml was a good idea, badly
> executed. And Jason Hicks' fine book
[...]
Fine book, but the author's name was Jason Hic
-
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Alain Frisch
> Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2011 09:51:07
> To: Martin DeMello
> Cc: Gerd Stolpmann; Jonathan
> Protzenko;
> Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Some comments on recent discussions
>
> On 12/13/2011 09:21 AM, Martin DeMello wro
On 13/12/2011, Alain Frisch wrote:
> As Xavier said, it would be great to find someone who'd like to join the
> core dev team in order to improve support for Windows. Anyone interested?
In my experience, OCaml is working mostly fine on Windows. I can see
some issues but nothing huge. Do you have
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 12:51 AM, Alain Frisch wrote:
>
> But in order to get really good support in the long term, which includes
> community tools (packaging, porting libraries, support for Windows API and
> .Net, documentation, etc), I think we need to find a way to "bootstrap" a
> larger commu
Stolpmann; Jonathan
Protzenko;
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Some comments on recent discussions
On 12/13/2011 09:21 AM, Martin DeMello wrote:
> it's a bit frustrating for me because i don't have or
> use windows either, but if i develop an end user app i really want it
> to be a
On 12/13/2011 09:21 AM, Martin DeMello wrote:
it's a bit frustrating for me because i don't have or
use windows either, but if i develop an end user app i really want it
to be as cross-platform as possible.
This attitude partially explains why support for OCaml under Windows
lacks behind: peop
good points. an alternative would be a wiki page describing step by
step and in detail, how to set up an ocaml development environment on
windows, particularly how to get ocamlfind and manual package
installation working. my friend couldn't manage to get Batteries
working either, even after he gave
Hi Martin,
GODI is currently broken on Windows, and I would need to invest again a
few days to get at least the basics running again. This is a big problem
for me, because I've personally no direct advantage from this, and there
is also the question how you can keep such a very different port runn
Better Windows support would be very nice too. A friend recently had a
python app that he wanted to port to native code, and I offered to do
it for him in OCaml. The linux version was quick and easy to develop,
and we both believed that he could just install OCaml and the required
libraries on wind
Am Samstag, den 10.12.2011, 22:12 +0100 schrieb ri...@happyleptic.org:
> What I'd really like is a way to mix any version I want of the packages I
> install, especially experimental versions for the packages I want to test or
> contribute to.
> I stopped using GODI some time ago because I wanted ma
Am Samstag, den 10.12.2011, 17:32 -0300 schrieb Andrei Formiga:
> On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 12:24 PM, Jonathan Protzenko
> wrote:
> >
> > = Improving the community =
> >
> > I think the main point of the discussion is to improve "the community". If
> > we really want to improve OCaml as a whole, then
On Sat, Dec 10, 2011 at 10:12 PM, wrote:
> What I'd really like is a way to mix any version I want of the packages I
> install, especially experimental versions for the packages I want to test
> or
> contribute to.
> I stopped using GODI some time ago because I wanted master of ocaml and
> batter
On 12/10/2011 04:49 PM, ri...@happyleptic.org wrote:
I will try to use it for some time.
But your description of it does not match my dreams.
Ideally, I would `odb install this-package --version=X.Y.Z`,
and `odb install another-one --branch=master`, and odb would
upgrade and/or rebuild what's req
> This is possible currently, by using the --stable, --testing and
> --unstable flags when installing different packages. Of course, the
> downside of this is that there's no guarantee or test of
> compatibility between packages and different versions of OCaml (and
> possibly each other). Oasis p
On 12/10/2011 04:12 PM, ri...@happyleptic.org wrote:
What I'd really like is a way to mix any version I want of the packages I
install, especially experimental versions for the packages I want to test or
contribute to.
I stopped using GODI some time ago because I wanted master of ocaml and
batter
What I'd really like is a way to mix any version I want of the packages I
install, especially experimental versions for the packages I want to test or
contribute to.
I stopped using GODI some time ago because I wanted master of ocaml and
batteries but stable versions of everything else. So I ended
On 12/10/2011 03:32 PM, Andrei Formiga wrote:
The question is: what should be done? What must be done to enable
OASIS-DB?
Sylvain has worked with me to enable auto-installation of oasis-db
packages via odb[2]. There's not a large repo of packages[1], but most
of it is auto-installable (run o
On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 12:24 PM, Jonathan Protzenko
wrote:
>
> = Improving the community =
>
> I think the main point of the discussion is to improve "the community". If
> we really want to improve OCaml as a whole, then I think we can put our
> efforts on better areas than patching the compiler.
On 12/07/2011 12:18 PM, Gabriel Scherer wrote:
>> The French book "Le langage Caml" is very great, althought it is quite old,
>> and althought examples used in the book (write a pascal compiler, a grep
>> tool and so on) is maybe too theoristic for engineer target.
>> Maybe a translation would be
On 12/06/2011 09:53 AM, Alain Frisch wrote:
> That said, I'd argue to avoid creating a "community" fork.
I would like to point out that in the GitHub jargon, a "fork" is just a
personal branch, usually intended to be merged back into the main
repository via a so-called "pull request".
I hope the
Hello,
On Thu, Dec 08, 2011 at 08:59:22AM +0100, ri...@happyleptic.org wrote:
> > The French book "Le langage Caml" is very great, althought it is quite old,
>
> I'd also like to advertise the book "Programmation Fonctionnelle, Générique et
> Objet" by Philippe Narbel that I found very good and
> The French book "Le langage Caml" is very great, althought it is quite old,
I'd also like to advertise the book "Programmation Fonctionnelle, Générique et
Objet" by Philippe Narbel that I found very good and which is probably more
up to date.
Such a book translated into english would be very val
On Wed, Dec 07, 2011 at 12:18:18PM +0100, Gabriel Scherer wrote:
[...]
> In the context of engineers-friendly OCaml learning document that
> could possibly warrant translation, there is also Maxence Guesdon's
> "Introduction au langage OCaml". I see it as a well-presented subset
> of the Oreilly bo
On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 8:15 AM, David MENTRE wrote:
> Another idea: adapt the book to ePub format extended with Javascript
> (apparently latest ePub draft has such scripting capabilities) and use
> js_of_ocaml tool to embed an OCaml toplevel inside the book: read the
> examples, execute examples,
On 7 déc. 2011, at 14:15, David MENTRE wrote:
> 2011/12/7 Gabriel Scherer :
>>> The French book "Le langage Caml" is very great,
>
> Yes, yes and yes!
>
> I especially loved the "do one *complete* program in one chapter of a
> few pages" approach.
Yes, it's a great start to write a course on Ca
Hello Gabriel,
[ I should not participate to such a thread... anyway I'm participating. :-) ]
2011/12/7 Gabriel Scherer :
>> The French book "Le langage Caml" is very great,
Yes, yes and yes!
I especially loved the "do one *complete* program in one chapter of a
few pages" approach.
>> although
> The French book "Le langage Caml" is very great, althought it is quite old,
> and althought examples used in the book (write a pascal compiler, a grep
> tool and so on) is maybe too theoristic for engineer target.
> Maybe a translation would be sufficient ?
( For those interested, the book is av
2011/12/7 Paolo Donadeo
>
>
> I don't say there are no problems, and everything is fine. But if I
> have do point at a problem, especially for newcomers, I would say that
> we need a book, an up to date book, written in good English and
> published by O'Relly.
>
The French book "Le langage Caml"
Ashish Agarwal writes:
> A "standard library" does not imply "big" or that it is part of the standard
> distribution. Both Batteries and Core would make fine standard libraries.
> Neither is very big and both are independent of the standard distribution. But
> having 5 different standard librarie
On 12/07/2011 04:00 AM, oliver wrote:
A book could be also done as a collaberative approach.
Yep, Ocsigen + Ocsimore + some coding and you have a good platform to
host it.
by "good" I mean, a wiki way, so that everyone can access it.
--
RMA.
--
Caml-list mailing list. Subscription manageme
A "standard library" does not imply "big" or that it is part of the
standard distribution. Both Batteries and Core would make fine standard
libraries. Neither is very big and both are independent of the standard
distribution. But having 5 different standard libraries is annoying
precisely because t
Hey! :-)
On Wed, Dec 07, 2011 at 01:18:35AM +0100, Paolo Donadeo wrote:
> I just want to add some erratic thoughts summoned by the recent
> flame... discussion about "the state of the OCaml
> union". For this reason I'm not pretending to be coherent or to have
> an answer to each and every probl
I just want to add some erratic thoughts summoned by the recent
flame... discussion about "the state of the OCaml
union". For this reason I'm not pretending to be coherent or to have
an answer to each and every problem, I'm not John Wayne and I'll never
be.
OCaml community is basically composed by
On 12/06/2011 07:31 AM, Joel Reymont wrote:
>
> On Dec 6, 2011, at 4:24 PM, Jonathan Protzenko wrote:
>
>> GitHub has a fantastic integration between the bug tracker, the
>> commit messages (git commit -m "Fix #486" closes bug 486 on the bug
>> tracker), the source repositories. You can discuss p
On 12/06/2011 04:24 PM, Jonathan Protzenko wrote:
I think the main point of the discussion is to improve "the community".
If we really want to improve OCaml as a whole, then I think we can put
our efforts on better areas than patching the compiler.
I completely disagree with you (and this is ra
>
>
> == Leaving our own corner of the web ==
>
> The OCaml community likes to stay in its own corner of the web, in
> isolation.
>
A narrow plug: I want to encourage people to post and comment on
http://www.reddit.com/r/ocaml. OCaml's web presence often looks like a
ghost town. I think it's start
> Dear OCaml hackers,
>
> I'm very uneasy about the current opinions that are voiced on the
> caml-list. I have good reasons to think I'm not the only one in that
> situation, so please allow me to raise a few concerns about some recent
> discussions.
>
> There's several subtopics in the "OCaml ma
I agree that package management, a *single* standard library, and a good
web presence are the most useful things we can do. We desperately need
oasis, oasis-db, and eventually an OCaml Platform to succeed. The standard
library contenders are Batteries and Jane St Core. Ideally these could be
merged
On Dec 6, 2011, at 16:24 , Jonathan Protzenko wrote:
> [...]
>
> If it's about improving the general situation with OCaml and its community
> (the title of this thread contains the word "community"), then I believe
> hacking on the compiler is not the most effective way to achieve that goal.
On 12/06/2011 06:24 PM, Jonathan Protzenko wrote:
Dear OCaml hackers,
I'm very uneasy about the current opinions that are voiced on the
caml-list. I have good reasons to think I'm not the only one in that
situation, so please allow me to raise a few concerns about some recent
discussions.
I jo
On Dec 6, 2011, at 4:24 PM, Jonathan Protzenko wrote:
> GitHub has a fantastic integration between the bug tracker, the commit
> messages (git commit -m "Fix #486" closes bug 486 on the bug tracker), the
> source repositories. You can discuss patches in-place. You can interact in a
> very easy
Dear OCaml hackers,
I'm very uneasy about the current opinions that are voiced on the
caml-list. I have good reasons to think I'm not the only one in that
situation, so please allow me to raise a few concerns about some recent
discussions.
There's several subtopics in the "OCaml maintenance
78 matches
Mail list logo
