Hello again, > - what naming policy should I use for ocaml program that have > a quite generic name (for example "report"). Should I use > a ocaml- prefix? How do we consider a program name is > too generic?
My two cents : every tool which is for a "development with OCaml" usage only should be called ocaml-XXX (ocaml-report, ocaml-zoggy, ...), while applications which in the end does not depend on OCaml should be called by their name only, like 'mldonkey'. Maybe i did not choose right names at the beginning... > Now, I have a request to Maxence: for any ocaml program in > Cameleon, you should build either the bytecode version or > the native one; I don't think building both is usefull. > Currently, in the debian package, I'm providing only the > native version when available and the bytecode one when not > (with the same name). Hum, yes, but not for all. For example, cameleon native and bytecode versions differ because the bytecode version allows the plug-in loading, but native version is faster. For tools where native and byte code versions do the same, I agree that I should only compile byt OR native. I'll do this in the future. But keeping bytecode AND native is good, isn't it ? -- Maxence -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
