Are c++ features a subset of java features?

[kwikius]

compilers for bytecode, native code and several related languages but they
all have some code in common.

Lets just restrict this to OCaml.

How many different software houses are producing OCaml compilers?

regards
Andy Little

 

[Jon Harrop]

Lets just restrict this to OCaml.

How many different software houses are producing OCaml compilers?

None outside academia.

 

[kwikius]

None outside academia.

OK. Ho many 'academic' software houses are producing OCaml compilers?

regards
Andy Little

 

[Jon Harrop]

OK. Ho many 'academic' software houses are producing OCaml compilers?

The main one is INRIA in France:

http://caml.inria.fr

There are probably a few dozen places around the world working on OCaml
compilers. There's MetaOCaml in the states. GCaml and JCaml. OCamil
for .NET. I've seen an OCaml compiler targetting the JVM. I just met a guy
in Cambridge who is writing an OCaml compiler with an extended type system
for web programming security. There's Ocsigen and CDuce. You might also
count the theorem provers like Coq.

Of course, academics share source code and there is no OCaml language
definition. So this isn't comparable to Intel and Microsoft developing C
compilers independently. This is more like asking "how many software houses
are producing Linux kernels?".

 

[kwikius]

The main one is INRIA in France:

http://caml.inria.fr

According to this OCaml is nearky as old as C++. Why do you think it
never took off?

regards
Andy Little

 

[Jon Harrop]

According to this OCaml is nearky as old as C++.

OCaml was 1996, IIRC.

Why do you think it never took off?

Like calculus hasn't taken off compared to Sudoku?

 

[Z.Meson]

Like calculus hasn't taken off compared to Sudoku?

That's not really a fair comparison -- Sudoku and Calculus aren't meant
to solve similar problems. For example, Sudoku can't be used to solve
physics problems.

However, OCaml and C++ are both computer languages and can be used to
solve similar problems even if their strengths lie in different areas.
More appropriate questions could include:
- Why hasn't Sudoku taken off compared to regular old crossword
puzzles?
- Why hasn't K-theory taken off comapred to calculus?
- Why hasn't Haskel taken off compared to C++?

So, I think it is fair to ask why OCaml hasn't taken off compared to
other computer languages. The answer may be 'OCaml is best at a
different set of problems, and those problems occur less frequently
than the set of problems C++ is good at' -- or it could be something
else -- but I think it's a fair question to ask.

- Kevin Hall

 

[kwikius]

OCaml was 1996, IIRC.


Like calculus hasn't taken off compared to Sudoku?

You mean that unless you can understand advanced maths then there is no
point in attempting to try and learn it.? If so I guess that answers
the question !

regards
Andy Little

 

[peter koch]

According to this OCaml is nearky as old as C++. Why do you think it
never took off?

There are probably lots of good programming languages, that never have
taken off for reasons unrelated to their abilities to solve what they
were meant to solve. One reason C++ took off was (apart from it being
a nice language to use) that it was based on C and thus widely
available (only required C Front to produce a working program) and
also easy to learn. But the C heritage is also responsible for the
many quirks of the language and a lot of its complexity.

/Peter