From: Nicolas C. <war...@fr...> - 2004-04-27 11:05:28
|
> > ExtLib is a project aiming at providing a complete - yet small - standard > > library for the OCaml programming langage. The purpose of this library is > > to add new functions to OCaml Standard Library modules, to modify some > > functions in order to get better performances or more safety > > (tail-recursive) but also to provide new modules which should be useful > > for the average OCaml programmer. > > > ExtLib is not directly related to OCaml authors (INRIA) although this > > library can be seen as a proposal for inclusion in the official > > distribution. > > Is SF-ExtLib supposed to be used from right now in serious projects? Yes, it's mature and bug-free enough. > Is it supposed to replace the INRIA standard library? No. We're positioning ourselves as a proposal for extension. That means that some parts of the ExtLib might be added to the OCaml stdlib if INRIA wish to do so : we would actually be happy about that. Whatever happens, we'll still maintain an independant library that can enrich the standard ocaml library and research additional ways of doing things better. > Why is there no answer from the SF-ExtLib team when I (or others) post > some code? This is very disappointing. I usually answer most of the messages, all subsribers on this list are also welcome to do so. If there is no answer to your message it means that maybe people here are too busy to answer, or maybe that there is no interest on this subject. If you're precisely talking about your recent post "('a,'b list ref) Hashtbl.t" then I personaly never had the need of such module (although I am programming ocaml almost everyday in different domains). That does not mean that it is not useful, but maybe that does mean it's not wide usage enough to be included. I dismissed myself from answering since I don't see how it can be useful. If some people were interested by this module, they would have answered. If there was a common agreement that it's useful (whatever my opinion) then I would have committed the code into the CVS. > If SF-ExtLib is supposed to build a standard, then what are the guidelines > for creating this standard? Not a standard, just a library. Guidelines are : - everybody can post some code or suggestions for improvement - all the process is open-sourced , including the talks and debates about what should be included or not - if there is a concensus, then the code is included. > As an independent OCaml user, I would like a separation between > general-purpose stuff and specialized libraries. > general-purpose = used in various kinds of applications (but maybe not > everyday) > specialized = used in very specific situations (but maybe everyday) > I can imagine: > - one library that provides lots of goodies that do not rely on other > existing libraries but are boring or difficult to implement. They do NOT > need to be required everyday by everyone. > - some libraries, like many already exist, for doing specialized > things. Especially the implementation of standard protocols or binding to > such libraries written in foreign languages. > > > Very personal view: I don't care much about standards as far as I can > include the (possibly modified) source code of the general-purpose > library in my software distributions in either source or binary form. ExtLib is general purpose. That means that some domain-specific code will not be included into it. For other reasons, such as easy porting, ExtLib is pure OCaml and does not contains any C code. Concerning the protocols ( IMAP, FTP, ... or formats : XML , ... ) my own opinion is that they could be added to ExtLib, that's not an opinion shared by all the users here so nothing have been decided yet. Regards, Nicolas Cannasse |