2009/9/18 arnuld uttre <[email protected]>: >> On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 7:59 PM, Michal Suchanek >> <[email protected]> wrote: > >> It's the same with C++. It allows for many things some of which I >> would consider monstrous. Whlie you can write nice code with it, much >> nicer than with C alone you still need to be aware of how things work >> internally. That's the basic thing in which C++ did not manage to step >> away form C, and that's probably also the thing that makes it possible >> to write a kernel in C++. > > Exactly thats what I have found. Sometimes I wonder if OCaml could be useful: > > http://steve.yegge.googlepages.com/ocaml > http://steve.yegge.googlepages.com/more-ocaml > http://www.ffconsultancy.com/languages/ray_tracer/comparison.html > http://people.cs.ubc.ca/~murphyk/Software/Ocaml/why_ocaml.html >
It certainly could. It seems to be sitting in the right spot on low-level - high-level scale when you are out for a language for mathematical computations. However, if you agree that the low-level nature of C/C++ is what makes it suitable for writing things like kernels then OCaml is probably not a better fit for such tasks. Thanks Michal
