Re: ocaml, jocaml, ocamlduce, *?caml

["Peter Groves" <pdgroves@gmail.com>]

On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 12:25 PM, Pietro Abate
<Pietro.Abate@pps.jussieu.fr> wrote:

>
>  What do you think ? Am I just considering a non existing problem ? Shall
>  we just leave jocaml/ocamlduce users alone to compile their own
>  librairies and see how it goes ?
>

While I'm just a lowly lurker on this list (not a maintainer), I'll
still throw in my two cents
as a potential user:

I'll soon be integrating a project with jocaml, and I have to say I
would be very unlikely
to try to use debian built libraries even if they were available.
Dealing with packages
built using p4 (or p5) extensions is a pain, and having another layer
of abstraction
between my code and the source would likely not make things easier, if
not worse. You
may come up with a very elegant solution but you will likely still
create yet another steep
learning curve for developers wanting to use these packages.

Also, I think it may be a precedent you don't really want to set -
every preprocessor extension
debian supports is essentially a new language to support.

Peter