Re: [Caml-list] Let-less syntax for coreML

2012-01-04 Thread Daniel Bünzli
The underlying question is how to make ML mainstream which is what the Am I the only one to be very, very, very, tired of this question ? There's an obvious thing missing in the list of what has been tried. Well-done and maintained libraries you can use for about any programming task you have

Re: [Caml-list] Let-less syntax for coreML

2012-01-04 Thread Andrej Bauer
I was once at a talk in which we discussed new programming concepts in a programming language. One person said a new programming language whose concepts are not understood by ordinary programers is worthless, to which another replied a new programming language whose concepts are understood by

[Caml-list] Semantic Web Journal: Call for Papers on Big Data: Theory and Practice

2012-01-04 Thread Pascal Hitzler
Deadline: February 13, 2012 Semantic Web Journal: Call for Papers on Big Data: Theory and Practice http://www.semantic-web-journal.net/blog/semantic-web-journal-call-papers-big-data-theory-and-practice Semantic Web Journal Call for Papers on Big Data: Theory and Practice

Re: [Caml-list] Let-less syntax for coreML

2012-01-04 Thread Edgar Friendly
On 01/04/2012 08:30 AM, Diego Olivier Fernandez Pons wrote: I think the biggest thing the community can do to improve OCaml is not to tweak around with language design. It's to improve the library packaging situation. Then just do it. I have, and the result is odb[1]. It

Re: [Caml-list] Let-less syntax for coreML

2012-01-04 Thread Markus Mottl
On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 07:18, Yaron Minsky ymin...@janestreet.com wrote: I think the biggest thing the community can do to improve OCaml is not to tweak around with language design.  It's to improve the library packaging situation.  Oasis seems to be the effort in this direction that has the

Re: [Caml-list] Let-less syntax for coreML

2012-01-04 Thread Damien Doligez
On 2012-01-04, at 14:30, Diego Olivier Fernandez Pons wrote: Mmm... I didn't request or even suggest a syntax change. I only asked what potential issues it could create. Here is one: as far as I can tell, it cannot be parsed by an LALR(1) parser. -- Damien -- Caml-list mailing list.

Re: [Caml-list] Hashtbl and security

2012-01-04 Thread Damien Doligez
On 2012-01-02, at 02:43, oliver wrote: If the type is an abstract type, which comes from something like Hashtbl.Randomseed and has type t, not type int, this problem would vanish. You have to be careful. If we make hash table randomization mandatory, the Frama-C people will hate us, as will

Re: [Caml-list] Understanding usage by the runtime

2012-01-04 Thread Damien Doligez
On 2012-01-01, at 13:44, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: Is compaction disabled? lablgtk disables it unconditionally by setting the global Gc max_overhead (see also the Gc documentation): src/gtkMain.ml: let () = Gc.set {(Gc.get()) with Gc.max_overhead = 100} Anyone who disables

Re: [Caml-list] Understanding usage by the runtime

2012-01-04 Thread John Carr
There is however something to do. Quoting lablgtk's README: IMPORTANT: Some Gtk data structures are allocated in the Caml heap, and their use in signals (Gtk functions internally cally callbacks) relies on their address being stable during a function call. For this reason automatic

Re: [Caml-list] Hashtbl and security

2012-01-04 Thread oliver
On Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at 06:56:11PM +0100, Damien Doligez wrote: On 2012-01-02, at 02:43, oliver wrote: If the type is an abstract type, which comes from something like Hashtbl.Randomseed and has type t, not type int, this problem would vanish. You have to be careful. If we make hash

oasis (was Re: [Caml-list] Let-less syntax for coreML)

2012-01-04 Thread Daniel Bünzli
On 4 January 2012 13:18, Yaron Minsky ymin...@janestreet.com wrote: I think the biggest thing the community can do to improve OCaml is not to tweak around with language design.  It's to improve the library packaging situation.  Oasis seems to be the effort in this direction that has the most