Jon, It looks like your plea may have been answered. The following popped up on reddit this morning:
"Cafesterol is an extension of the Objective Caml compiler suite that generates Java bytecode. Cafesterol provides an ocamljava compiler that is the Java counterpart of ocamlc/ocamlopt compilers distributed with the Objective Caml standard distribution. Cafesterol, in its 1.0 alpha version builds with the 3.10.0 version of Objective Caml. The produced Java classes need the 1.0 alpha version of Cadmium to run and can be executed on any Java 1.5 virtual machine." http://cafesterol.x9c.fr/ Regards, Neil On 5 Nov 2007, at 03:27, Jon Harrop wrote: > > On Monday 05 November 2007 02:34, Steve Lianoglou wrote: >> Hi Jon, >> >> While it's going to take me a while to make heads or tails of your >> entire post, I just wanted to thank you for taking the time to write >> such a detailed response. >> >> Thanks! > > Not at all. I described the major points but there are still many > other > aspects of Scala that I am undecided on. Scala, OCaml and F# all take > different approaches to the rich syntax of user-defined operators, > particularly infix operators. The Scala approach of using member > functions > called "+" is quite alien to me and it involves some trade-offs. > After almost > a year of working full-time on F#, I am still undecided on whether > or not > mixing C#-style operator overloading and ML-style type inference in > F# is a > good thing. In the end, there may be more aspects of Scala that I > consider to > be sub-optimal design decisions. > > There are also practical problems when migrating from a stand-alone > FPL like > OCaml to one hosted by an existing platform like .NET or the JVM. > Stand-alone > FPLs like OCaml and MLton are fantastically efficient but .NET and > the JVM > are optimized for heavily-imperative code. Consequently, allocation > often > makes functional F# programs run 5x slower than equivalent OCaml, > exceptions > are 600x slower in F# than in OCaml (and they are a core part of the > CAML > family of languages, used extensively in ordinary non-exceptional > code: > OCaml's exceptions are very fast, around 6x faster than C++!) and > marshalling > in F# has been 1,000x slower for me. > > I honestly thought that I could grok F# from my OCaml background in > only a few > months but a year later and I am still battling with all of these > trade-offs, > design decisions and I have barely dented the issue of libraries, > active web > pages, Windows Presentation Foundation and so forth. > > Following a discussion on Lambda the Ultimate, I am working on an > article > comparing and contrasting the OCaml and F# languages in detail. I'll > let you > know when I make the article freely available on our site. I think > many of > the points will be very relevant for people trying to build modern > languages > for the JVM. > > There is one thing I am sure of: the future is bright for functional > programming! > > -- > Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. > http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/?e > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "JVM Languages" group. To post to this group, send email to jvm-languages@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/jvm-languages?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
