Growth of the CAML family of languages
Jon Harrop
The recent productization of F# by Microsoft has caused a growth spurt in
the CAML family of functional programming languages:
http://www.google.com/trends?q=common+lisp%2Cocaml%2Cf%23
Common Lisp is a good comparison because it is in slow but steady decline.
--
Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/?u
D Herring
> The recent productization of F# by Microsoft has caused a growth spurt in
> the CAML family of functional programming languages:
>
> http://www.google.com/trends?q=common+lisp%2Cocaml%2Cf%23
>
> Common Lisp is a good comparison because it is in slow but steady decline.
Thanks for the info. Tell me when I should switch to BSD.
Quick question: Did Latin and Greek fall out of favor because they
were inferior too?
Thanks for the insight.
- Daniel
Evan Monroig
> The recent productization of F# by Microsoft has caused a growth spurt
> in the CAML family of functional programming languages:
>
> http://www.google.com/trends?q=common+lisp%2Cocaml%2Cf%23
It is interesting that the example news results for F# are things like
"Get the F#*k Out and Vote!".
Evan
Christophe
Hello,
Why Common Lisp and not just Lisp ?
Best Regards
namekuseijin
wrote:
> Why Common Lisp and not just Lisp ?
because Scheme still thrives.
namekuseijin
yes, and Scheme is also too much general a term to make any
claims... :P
Frank Buss
> ...or look at this one, really nice:
>
> http://www.google.com/trends?q=CL%2CScheme%2CF%23
And Lisp is as popular as Forth, with Lisp decreasing a bit the last years
:-)
http://www.google.com/trends?q=lisp%2Cforth
--
Frank Buss, f...@frank-buss.de
http://www.frank-buss.de, http://www.it4-systems.de
David Golden
> And Lisp is as popular as Forth, with Lisp decreasing a bit the last
> years
> :-)
There's clearly significant correlation between lisp and platypus
trendiness though:
http://www.google.com/trends?q=lisp%2Cplatypus
:-)
Jon Harrop
> Why Common Lisp and not just Lisp ?
Lisp is a homonym: you'd be searching for speech impediments. In contrast,
OCaml, Erlang and F# are almost entirely unambiguous.
Tim Bradshaw
>
> Lisp is a homonym: you'd be searching for speech impediments. In contrast,
> OCaml, Erlang and F# are almost entirely unambiguous.
Of course, you could always, say, look at newsgroup volume because
newsgroups actually refer to the languages. Of course that would be a
bit embarrassing for F#. I guess all the cool dudes who write F#
discus stuff via internet chat rooms or whatever the fashion is these
days.
CL looks to be doing fine though compared to various other things:
http://www.tfeb.org/scratch/
namekuseijin
> I guess all the cool dudes who write F#
> discus stuff via internet chat rooms or whatever the fashion is these
> days.
probably MSN...
Rainer Joswig
Tim Bradshaw <tfb+g...@tfeb.org> wrote:
Well, the IRC channel for OCAML is also not that crowded.
A tenth in volume compared to the Lisp or the Haskell channel.
People complain that they cannot get Harrop's stuff to work -
just today on the OCAML IRC channel.
Given that he is busy posting his frog shit here, he
has no time for his 'customers'.
Tim Bradshaw
>
> Well, the IRC channel for OCAML is also not that crowded.
Yeah, but, you know, IRC, WTF is that stuff? That's some shit hippies
used in the 60s on the arpawen or whatever it was they had back then,
no one uses that crap any more. It's all, like, Instant MS Bebo# 2.0
now, you know? You'll be talking about mailing lists or some bogus
stuff, that's even more, like, old than texting any minute. That's
just, so 90s you know? Get with the program, dude, I know you like
lisp and all, but there's really no excuse for that kind of laggy
trash. I bet you don't even have, like, a moby. Wow.
This message brought to you by desoxyephedrine and the hosts file.
Dimiter "malkia" Stanev
> Christophe wrote:
>> Why Common Lisp and not just Lisp ?
>
> Lisp is a homonym: you'd be searching for speech impediments. In contrast,
> OCaml, Erlang and F# are almost entirely unambiguous.
>
F# and C# are musical notes. Aren't those homonyms too?
Dimiter "malkia" Stanev
> The recent productization of F# by Microsoft has caused a growth spurt in
> the CAML family of functional programming languages:
>
> http://www.google.com/trends?q=common+lisp%2Cocaml%2Cf%23
>
> Common Lisp is a good comparison because it is in slow but steady decline.
>
You know what... OCAML and F# might be just fine languages, but your
coming here in this newsgroup and advertising it for no reasons, or
stating "internet" facts, just gives bad image for those languages. In
the long term, you are not going to make more people to look into them,
you are going to make more people associating those languages with you.
Slobodan Blazeski
Kent M Pitman
> The recent productization of [G flat] by Microsoft has caused
> a growth spurt [...]
Enough that they can afford to buy you your own newsgroup?
That would be good news indeed.
Thanks for sharing ... the news, I mean, not the newsgroup.
- - - - -
Sigh.
This is why gated communities come into being. It's sad when people
have to wall themselves off. But it's also sad when people can't
observe common sense rules, like the notion that a newsgroup labeled
x should be for people who like x and want to discuss it. That's why
they are sometimes called "interest groups". They are certainly not
"disinterest groups".
Dimiter "malkia" Stanev
> This is why gated communities come into being. It's sad when people
> have to wall themselves off. But it's also sad when people can't
> observe common sense rules, like the notion that a newsgroup labeled
> x should be for people who like x and want to discuss it. That's why
> they are sometimes called "interest groups". They are certainly not
> "disinterest groups".
Yup. Wouldn't that be somehow related to
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons ?
Don Geddis
> Jon Harrop wrote:
>> Lisp is a homonym: you'd be searching for speech impediments. In contrast,
>> OCaml, Erlang and F# are almost entirely unambiguous.
>
> F# and C# are musical notes. Aren't those homonyms too?
Yes, of course. Worse, the quick Google search for F# mostly catches
deliberately-obfuscated expletives ("F#@K"), having nothing at all to do
with the language.
The swamp resident was corrected the first time he posted this kind of
meaningless comparison, but he is interested in propaganda, not truth.
So he ignored the correction, and is back again saying the same thing.
-- Don
_______________________________________________________________________________
Don Geddis http://don.geddis.org/ d...@geddis.org
Measure wealth not by the things you have, but by the things you have for which
you would not take money.
Jon Harrop
> "Dimiter \"malkia\" Stanev" <mal...@gmail.com> wrote on Fri, 02 Nov 2007:
>> Jon Harrop wrote:
>>> Lisp is a homonym: you'd be searching for speech impediments. In
>>> contrast, OCaml, Erlang and F# are almost entirely unambiguous.
>>
>> F# and C# are musical notes. Aren't those homonyms too?
>
> Yes, of course. Worse, the quick Google search for F# mostly catches
> deliberately-obfuscated expletives ("F#@K"), having nothing at all to do
> with the language.
>
> The swamp resident was corrected the first time he posted this kind of
> meaningless comparison, but he is interested in propaganda, not truth.
> So he ignored the correction, and is back again saying the same thing.
Can you explain why the musical note only gained notoriety on Google Trends
recently, when the F# programming language was released?
The fact is that, for whatever reason, the musical note F# has no
significant effect on that keywords rank according to Google Trends.
Jon Harrop
> CL looks to be doing fine though compared to various other things:
> http://www.tfeb.org/scratch/
CL is as popular as JavaScript by that metric, which is clearly untrue.
Jon Harrop
--
Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/ocaml_for_scientists/chapter1.html
Jon Harrop
> Well, the IRC channel for OCAML is also not that crowded.
You'll probably find more Lisp libraries hosted on Gopher as well, and more
Lispers in old people's homes.
> People complain that they cannot get Harrop's stuff to work -
> just today on the OCAML IRC channel.
Perhaps if they asked me instead of you...
Ken Tilton
Jon Harrop wrote:
> The recent productization of F# by Microsoft has caused a growth spurt in
> the CAML family of functional programming languages:
>
> http://www.google.com/trends?q=common+lisp%2Cocaml%2Cf%23
>
> Common Lisp is a good comparison because it is in slow but steady decline.
>
Now where is the c.l.f guy who provided that glowing testimonial to the
fine Usenet character and contributions of Medicine Man Harrumph?
Wherever you are, please curb your frog. Or at least shut up in the
future with the toadal tributes.
thx!
kzo
--
http://www.theoryyalgebra.com/
"In the morning, hear the Way;
in the evening, die content!"
-- Confucius
Raymond Wiker
> The recent productization of F# by Microsoft has caused a growth spurt in
> the CAML family of functional programming languages:
>
> http://www.google.com/trends?q=common+lisp%2Cocaml%2Cf%23
>
> Common Lisp is a good comparison because it is in slow but steady decline.
Complaint sent to ab...@supernews.com.
Jon Harrop
LOL.
Rainer Joswig
Jon Harrop <use...@jdh30.plus.com> wrote:
> namekuseijin wrote:
> > On 2 nov, 14:57, Tim Bradshaw <tfb+goo...@tfeb.org> wrote:
> >> I guess all the cool dudes who write F#
> >> discus stuff via internet chat rooms or whatever the fashion is these
> >> days.
> >
> > probably MSN...
>
> http://cs.hubfs.net
Who is Online
There are 0 guest(s) online. Currently there are no online users.
Rainer Joswig
Jon Harrop <use...@jdh30.plus.com> wrote:
> The recent productization of F# by Microsoft has caused a growth spurt in
> the CAML family of functional programming languages:
>
> http://www.google.com/trends?q=common+lisp%2Cocaml%2Cf%23
>
> Common Lisp is a good comparison because it is in slow but steady decline.
The crazy frog has now invaded Lambda the Ultimate.
Markus E L
Ken Tilton wrote:
> Jon Harrop wrote:
>> The recent productization of F# by Microsoft has caused a growth spurt in
>> the CAML family of functional programming languages:
>> http://www.google.com/trends?q=common+lisp%2Cocaml%2Cf%23
>> Common Lisp is a good comparison because it is in slow but steady
>> decline.
>>
>
> Now where is the c.l.f guy who provided that glowing testimonial to
> the fine Usenet character and contributions of Medicine Man Harrumph?
>
> Wherever you are, please curb your frog. Or at least shut up in the
> future with the toadal tributes.
>
> thx!
>
> kzo
Shut up, Kenny. The fact that somebody (probably me) defended the
right of JH (whom I often don't agree with) to post to c.l.l, even on
controversial topics, without being verbally assaulted and maligned by
people with a borderline tourette syndrome, doesn't make that a
"glowing testimonial". It just makes a declaration about the open
character of Usenet: You're always free to use a news client which can
suppress Jons postings (or ignore them yourself if you don't want to
change your client).
BTW: You've been crossposting to c.l.f again. Believe me: You and your
style of discussion are not wanted here. If it relieves the pressure
of compulsion, well, so be it, since we can't stop you anyway, but you
don't seriously believe that you get any useful discussion after such
a contribution, nor will you get rid of Jon (as experience should have
tought you). So why to you even try? I humbly suggest you stay away
from c.l.f with your kind of posting.
(And yes, this posting for once goes to c.l.l as well to make my
position on that quite clear to those that have been reading Ken's
epistle).
Regards -- Markus
Barry Fishman
topic or at least already discussed in this group well beyond the
point that would put anyone to sleep, I didn't think anyone would
mind.
I am having trouble playing staccato passages with my violin. Could
anyone explain what I need to do.
Normally I would post this to music.violin but it seems to be
difficult to get useful responses in that group. Every discussion
seems to be hijacked by someone who want to convince everyone that
they should be playing guitar.
He says that guitars have frets which makes them "note safe", and any
instrument that isn't "note safe" is terribly out of date. Any poster
that tries to say that some music can not be played on guitars, he
gives the reply that all instruments are "Bach equivalent", and any
note not on the chromatic scale is just noise. But then he talks
about all the thing he can do on the guitar that can't be done on the
violin. If someone explains how they can do these things on the
violin, he responds that "all sufficiently long violin pieces try to
implement guitar music, badly", whatever that means.
He posts all kinds of guitar music. He has timing data which shows
how much faster he can play pieces on the guitar than other
instruments. At least to my ear, his music does not sound very good.
I guess I just find real violin music more interesting.
Somehow he thinks to think all this makes him seem very bright. He
claims he is doing this to prevent people from choosing the wrong
instrument, but it I noticed he has an ad for his guitar shop in all
of his messages.
I am sure nothing like this would happen in comp.lang.lisp.
Programmers are far more rational then us musicians. Such nonsense
would be ignored and the person would soon go away. If only we
musicians could be less emotional in out messages.
Well, if anyone could help me out I would appreciate it.
--
Barry Fishman
Sacha
> ...
I would recommend that you learn piano, it is both "note safe" and
abstracts the hardware away.
Rainer Joswig
Barry Fishman <barry_...@acm.org> wrote:
Check out the FM-VIOLIN functionality in Common Lisp Music.
http://ccrma.stanford.edu/software/clm/
Especially the file v.ins should provide you with everything you
need.
Download clm-3.tar.gz
Unpack.
Start one of the supported Lisps.
(load "all.lisp")
(compile-file "v.ins")
(load "v")
(with-sound () (fm-violin 0 1 440 .1))
You should hear a note.
Now all you have to do is writing some staccato function.
Have fun. ;-)
namekuseijin
> Programmers are far more rational then us musicians.
very nice. Is he the leader of the band The Flying Frogs?
OTOH, your comparison may provide more fuel to his claims that ML-
based languages are the new, hip thing, and Lispers are old farts used
to latin, greek and the ideals of classicism...
Ken Tilton
Markus E L wrote:
> Ken Tilton wrote:
>
>
>>Jon Harrop wrote:
>>
>>>The recent productization of F# by Microsoft has caused a growth spurt in
>>>the CAML family of functional programming languages:
>>> http://www.google.com/trends?q=common+lisp%2Cocaml%2Cf%23
>>>Common Lisp is a good comparison because it is in slow but steady
>>>decline.
>>>
>>
>>Now where is the c.l.f guy who provided that glowing testimonial to
>>the fine Usenet character and contributions of Medicine Man Harrumph?
>>
>>Wherever you are, please curb your frog. Or at least shut up in the
>>future with the toadal tributes.
>>
>>thx!
>>
>>kzo
>
>
> Shut up, Kenny. The fact that somebody (probably me)
I think you owe Bill Cosby a royalty:
Shop teacher: "Anybody who would put a bullet in the kiln must not have
a very good mother."
Student: "I didn't put the bullet in the oven so stop talking about my
mother!"
>.. defended the
> right of JH (whom I often don't agree with) to post to c.l.l, even on
> controversial topics, without being verbally assaulted and maligned by
> people with a borderline tourette syndrome, doesn't make that a
> "glowing testimonial".
Probably was not you then, it was definitely glowing. Kind of a North
Shore of Kaui sunset in winter glow. Glowing, definitely glowing. Google
"glowing frog" maybe...
> It just makes a declaration about the open
> character of Usenet: You're always free to use a news client which can
> suppress Jons postings (or ignore them yourself if you don't want to
> change your client).
>
> BTW: You've been crossposting to c.l.f again.
[Omigod, the dumbfuck thinks that was a mistake!]
>... Believe me: You and your
> style of discussion are not wanted here. If it relieves the pressure
> of compulsion, well, so be it, since we can't stop you anyway, but you
> don't seriously believe that you get any useful discussion after such
> a contribution, nor will you get rid of Jon (as experience should have
> tought you). So why to you even try? I humbly suggest you stay away
> from c.l.f with your kind of posting.
>
> (And yes, this posting for once goes to c.l.l as well to make my
> position on that quite clear...
[I think he is starting to catch on.]
I just want to make sure whoever wrote that glowing testimonial and then
slinked away with his tail between his legs when cll pointed out to him
that he had no idea how Harrop was behaving would learn painfully day in
and day out tediously and obnoxiously how Harrop is behaving. Seems to
be working.
comp.lang.functional has Jon Harrop to thank for my presence, and so it
will stay until... is it true frog's legs taste like chicken? Could we
find out?
Now excuse me while I go subscribe to c.l.f.
kt
Ken Tilton
Markus E L wrote:
> Markus E L wrote:
>
>
>>>Common Lisp is a good comparison because it is in slow but steady decline.
>>
>>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>
>>Why don't you use Cobol then? BTW, the method is questionable: I see
>
>
>
> Please ignore me :-). I just noticed that I probably transplanted this
> thread from c.l.l to c.l.f. Since I don't post on c.l.l I can't very
> well give an answer and certainly not at c.l.f which (I think) should
> not be abused to wage wars that cannot be waged in c.l.l.
>
> So, em, sorry.
>
> Regards -- Markus
So it is OK to encourage Toad Harrop on c.l.l but you /apologize/ for
doing so here? I can see why you like his style of Usenet participation.
Instead of yelling at me with whom you have no influence, why don't you
talk to Jonny boy about /his/ behavior? Oh, I forgot, he is a fine
Usenet citizen....
<sigh>
kzo
Xah Lee
«
The recent productization of F# by Microsoft has caused a growth spurt
in
the CAML family of functional programming languages:
http://www.google.com/trends?q=common+lisp%2Cocaml%2Cf%23
decline.
I think your suggestion is forced, and you probably knew it.
If you just use the keyword "lisp" in google trends, you'll find that
they far surpass ocaml and f# in popularity, and to me this seems a
more reasonable accessment of reality.
You say in other post in this thread that the word "lisp" by itself
alsoo refers to speech impediment. That's true, but if you google
search on "lisp", the first 5 pages all refers to lisp the language,
none refers to lisp the speech defect. (i haven't checked further to
see at which page it starts to refer to the speech defect) This is
also compatible to my observations. Lisp as a speech defect is
esoteric. I actually don't know about that meaning until reading
somewhere in lisp programer's gossips. (this is in early 1990s) For
vast majority of programers, if he doesn't know that lisp is a
programing lang, i think he wouldn't know it means speech defect.
honestly, i personally don't think Ocmal is more popular than Haskell,
and Haskell is far less popular than Lisp. A plausible reason for this
is that lisp(s) has been around for about 4 decades, and there are a
lot lisp code that are still relevant today. While Haskell, OCamel,
are very young, are predominently academic and used in esoteric niche
markets. (often just a few exemplary cases cited by the lang's
websites)
Microsoft's bringing out of F# is interesting. Possibly, it will
surpasse any of lisp or Haskell (and i'd cheer for it), but this
hasn't happend yet.
Common Lisp itself, is actually going thru a lot growth in the past 5
years starting post-doc-com.
it should be said here, that personally i don't give a hot shit about
Common Lisp, and in the past year i have completely lost any lingering
affection on Scheme Lisp (with its Guile pipe dream circa 1998 and now
R6RS fiasco; and mostly its motherfucking academic bag of aloof and
stilted morons). I think a significant portion of Common Lisp regulars
here are aggresive morons. The part i hold dear about lisp, is in its
general quality, thinking, and functional programing orientation, and
the lisp i really care with practicality is Emacs Lisp.
Emacs lisp is interesting, in that it is one of those quite language
without a zealot community (other example in this class are
JavaScript, PHP), and is constantly sneered by both Common Lispers and
Schemers, yet is probably the lang that had the most practical impact
to programers in introducing Lisp as well as functional programing,
and being a practical tool who's popularity far exceeds all other
lisps combined.
Further readings:
· Computer Language Popularity Trend
http://xahlee.org/lang_traf/index.html
· the Measure of a Language
http://xahlee.org/UnixResource_dir/writ/measure_lang.html
· What Languages to Hate?
http://xahlee.org/UnixResource_dir/writ/language_to_hate.html
· Text Processing with Emacs Lisp
http://xahlee.org/emacs/elisp_text_processing.html
Raffael Cavallaro
> Programmers are far more rational then us musicians.
Some of us are programmer-musicians ;^)
"Let's Go Fly a Frog"
(to the tune of "Let's go Fly a Kite")
Caring tuppence for Usenetiquette
You can spam comp lang lisp without let
If the camel's fame dips
you can shift all your chips
and put toady lips
to the the Microsoft tit
Oh, oh, oh!
Let's go fly a frog
Out of the function'l bog
Let's go fly a frog and send it spamming
crosspost to comp lang lisp
looking for website hits
Oh let's go fly a frog
Bob Felts
Maybe he's right. I'm 52, spent a year learning Koine Greek, and prefer
Lisp to every other language I've ever used (although Greek does have
its charms).
But if he is right, it simply confirms the adage, "Even a blind frog
finds a tadpole in the pond every once in awhile."
namekuseijin
> it should be said here, that personally i don't give a hot shit about
> Common Lisp, and in the past year i have completely lost any lingering
> affection on Scheme Lisp (with its Guile pipe dream circa 1998 and now
> R6RS fiasco; and mostly its motherfucking academic bag of aloof and
> stilted morons).
I don't understand how one single, minor Scheme implementation among
many very good ones and a highly criticized comittee standard have had
this effect on you. Besides, its "motherfucking academic bag of aloof
and
stilted morons" has been the sole responsible for the only hints of
Lisp modernization for the past decades, like providing first-class
continuations, hygienic macros and gearing towards functional
programming head-on, while CL continues firmly rooted in the 60s/70s
imperative mentality.
> The part i hold dear about lisp, is in its
> general quality, thinking, and functional programing orientation, and
> the lisp i really care with practicality is Emacs Lisp.
the only reason for elisp being relevant is because it's the fuel of
one of the best programming tools around. It's not like it's a great
language, just that you absolutely need it in its niche. It's the
same for PHP.
Slobodan Blazeski
s'il-vous-plait-mac.com> wrote:
Now dear usenet users please watch the latest video of c.l.l
production, presenting our resident spammer, the plummeting pond
dweller,(crescendo) the toad Jon Harrop, big applause for him.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ydmjzc20esI
Tobias C. Rittweiler
> Sigh.
>
> This is why gated communities come into being. It's sad when people
> have to wall themselves off. But it's also sad when people can't
> observe common sense rules, like the notion that a newsgroup labeled
> x should be for people who like x and want to discuss it. That's why
> they are sometimes called "interest groups". They are certainly not
> "disinterest groups".
"Unfortunately, removing morons from the Net is not considered useful
by the morons. If they were smarter, they would figure out the value
to all of going away, but not being smarter, they do not."
Wise words from an egregious man.
-T.
Jeff Bopp
Jon Harrop
> You say in other post in this thread that the word "lisp" by itself
> alsoo refers to speech impediment. That's true, but if you google
> search on "lisp", the first 5 pages all refers to lisp the language,
> none refers to lisp the speech defect.
I get 3/10 non-CL results on the first page. YMMV. Regardless, there is a
difference between how often terms are searching for and how many results
are returned. Google Trends measures the former:
http://www.google.com/intl/en/trends/about.html
> honestly, i personally don't think Ocmal is more popular than Haskell,
Agreed. Haskell has grown thanks to several books being published recently
as well as O'Reilly's announcement of a new one.
> and Haskell is far less popular than Lisp.
By most metrics they are comparable: well within an order of magnitude. They
all have similar numbers of projects on Freshmeat, for example:
http://freshmeat.net/browse/160/
8,841 C
5,800 Java
4,856 C++
4,280 PHP
3,784 Perl
2,908 Python
1,066 JavaScript
1,012 Unix Shell
546 SQL
500 Tcl
438 Ruby
382 Objective C
304 C#
294 Other
256 Assembly
165 Other Scripting Engines
148 Scheme
96 PL/SQL
92 Lisp
89 OCaml
84 Fortran
80 Delphi
75 Haskell
64 Ada
64 Common Lisp
60 Emacs-Lisp
59 Pascal
54 Awk
51 Zope
47 ASP
45 Visual Basic
39 Lua
37 Basic
34 Eiffel
33 ML
Note that there are many overlaps where projects are classified as both Lisp
and Common Lisp, so you cannot add the two numbers.
Google fights for "written in *" indicates that they are in the same order
of magnitude:
C: 1,380,000
C#: 450,000
Lisp: 58,300
Haskell: 34,300
Common Lisp: 27,500
OCaml: 23,800
> A plausible reason for this
> is that lisp(s) has been around for about 4 decades, and there are a
> lot lisp code that are still relevant today. While Haskell, OCaml,
> are very young, are predominently academic and used in esoteric niche
> markets. (often just a few exemplary cases cited by the lang's
> websites)
Actually, the CAML family of languages are already widely used in industry:
Microsoft have a considerable investment in the CAML family of languages.
Their third-party driver verification software is written in OCaml. Their
next major language on the .NET platform, F#, is a CAML derivative.
Microsoft make extensive use of both OCaml and F# internally. For example,
Microsoft trust the $2bn advertising market on MSN Live to F# code.
Intel also make significant use of OCaml for hardware verification in their
billion dollar chip market.
The FFT routines in MATLAB are written in OCaml and The MathWorks sell
add-ons written in SML.
Canon, Philips, Boeing, Sun, Lockheed-Martin and various other large
companies are among our customers, all of whom use OCaml in industry.
We also have dozens of smaller companies among our customers including
XenSource, whose value-add over the free edition of Xen is largely a
distributed, cross-platform management tool stack written in OCaml. They
recently sold to Citrix for $500M.
Jane St. Capital have over 20 OCaml programmers working in offices around
the world on finance. They recently expanded with a new office in London.
Several other financial houses use functional programming languages
extensively. Outside ML, Haskell is also popular in the financial sector
following a seminal paper by Simon Peyton-Jones.
So I would not say that OCaml is "predominantly academic". In fact, I think
you'll be hard-pressed to find similarly large-scale and recent adoptions
of Lisp in industry.
> Common Lisp itself, is actually going thru a lot growth in the past 5
> years starting post-doc-com.
Really? I was under the impression that Lisp had barely grown at all
recently:
http://www.google.com/trends?q=common+lisp%2Clisp
> Emacs lisp is interesting, in that it is one of those quite language
> without a zealot community (other example in this class are
> JavaScript, PHP), and is constantly sneered by both Common Lispers and
> Schemers, yet is probably the lang that had the most practical impact
> to programers in introducing Lisp as well as functional programing,
> and being a practical tool who's popularity far exceeds all other
> lisps combined.
True.
> Further readings:
>
> · Computer Language Popularity Trend
> http://xahlee.org/lang_traf/index.html
I think the number of posts on usenet does not correlate with language
popularity. For example, the JavaScript newsgroup gets roughly as many
posts as c.l.lisp yet JavaScript sells 100x as many books.
Jon Harrop
> You say in other post in this thread that the word "lisp" by itself
> alsoo refers to speech impediment. That's true, but if you google
> search on "lisp", the first 5 pages all refers to lisp the language,
> none refers to lisp the speech defect. (i haven't checked further to
> see at which page it starts to refer to the speech defect) This is
> also compatible to my observations.
If you compare Google hits for "lisp" and "lisp -impediment" you cut 90% of
the hits by removing references to the speech impediment, but the same does
not happen with other languages:
java: 282,000,000
lisp: 21,300,000
f#: 7,260,000
ocaml: 4,300,000
java impediment: 254,000,000
f# -impediment: 2,410,000
ocaml -impediment: 2,130,000
lisp -impediment: 2,080,000
Also, this is not true of the F# musical note:
f# -note: 2,390,000
Interestingly, despite Lisp's advantage of enormous legacy it still comes
out at the bottom of the list...
Rainer Joswig
Jon Harrop <use...@jdh30.plus.com> wrote:
> Xah Lee wrote:
> > You say in other post in this thread that the word "lisp" by itself
> > alsoo refers to speech impediment. That's true, but if you google
> > search on "lisp", the first 5 pages all refers to lisp the language,
> > none refers to lisp the speech defect. (i haven't checked further to
> > see at which page it starts to refer to the speech defect) This is
> > also compatible to my observations.
>
> If you compare Google hits for "lisp" and "lisp -impediment" you cut 90% of
> the hits by removing references to the speech impediment, but the same does
> not happen with other languages:
>
> java: 282,000,000
> lisp: 21,300,000
> f#: 7,260,000
> ocaml: 4,300,000
Click through the result pages for OCAML.
After 804 results there are no more.
Results 801 - 804 of about 4,490,000 for ocaml
Where are the others?
>
> java impediment: 254,000,000
> f# -impediment: 2,410,000
> ocaml -impediment: 2,130,000
> lisp -impediment: 2,080,000
>
> Also, this is not true of the F# musical note:
>
> f# -note: 2,390,000
>
> Interestingly, despite Lisp's advantage of enormous legacy it still comes
> out at the bottom of the list...
You might want to improve Google's code using OCAML. That
would be more interesting than counting frog eggs.
Jon Harrop
> Click through the result pages for OCAML.
>
> After 804 results there are no more.
>
> Results 801 - 804 of about 4,490,000 for ocaml
>
> Where are the others?
Click on "repeat the search with the omitted results included." and read the
sign:
"Sorry, Google does not serve more than 1000 results for any query."
Rainer Joswig
Jon Harrop <use...@jdh30.plus.com> wrote:
> Rainer Joswig wrote:
> > Click through the result pages for OCAML.
> >
> > After 804 results there are no more.
> >
> > Results 801 - 804 of about 4,490,000 for ocaml
> >
> > Where are the others?
>
> Click on "repeat the search with the omitted results included." and read the
> sign:
>
> "Sorry, Google does not serve more than 1000 results for any query."
Then you find mostly machine generated pages like
messages from Debian.
Accepted ocamlnet 0.98-1 (powerpc source)
Accepted ocamlnet 1.1-1 (source i386)
Good luck with your business with machines.
namekuseijin
> They all have similar numbers of projects on Freshmeat, for example:
>
> http://freshmeat.net/browse/160/
> 8,841 C
> 5,800 Java
> 4,856 C++
> 4,280 PHP
...
> 148 Scheme
...
> 92 Lisp
> 89 OCaml
...
> 75 Haskell
> 64 Common Lisp
> 60 Emacs-Lisp
...
> 33 ML
> Note that there are many overlaps where projects are classified as both Lisp
> and Common Lisp, so you cannot add the two numbers.
BOOYA!! Scheme is above both Common Lisp, Haskell and OCaml! :D :P
> Actually, the CAML family of languages are already widely used in industry:
ok, we already know your examples. You post them everywhere...
namekuseijin
> If you compare Google hits for "lisp" and "lisp -impediment" you cut 90% of
> the hits by removing references to the speech impediment, but the same does
> not happen with other languages:
>
> java: 282,000,000
> lisp: 21,300,000
> f#: 7,260,000
> ocaml: 4,300,000
>
> java impediment: 254,000,000
> f# -impediment: 2,410,000
> ocaml -impediment: 2,130,000
> lisp -impediment: 2,080,000
very funny...
samantha
> In article <13il636gk9j8...@corp.supernews.com>,
Amazing. A thread 41 entries long about absolutely nothing at all
much less anything to do with lisp. Dumb monkeys.
Ken Tilton
it is here! Glad to help, kzo
--
Rainer Joswig
Ken Tilton <kenny...@optonline.net> wrote:
> Rainer, you forgot to cross-post to c.l.f. This is as relevant there as
> it is here! Glad to help, kzo
Right, especially comp.lang.functional should know that
there is this fantastic growth in OCAML. Lots
of business opportunities. Thanks to Jon Harrop
for this wonderful information. Jon, you are
the hero of the Functional Programming community, tireless
bringing the light to the morons living in the
dark age. Thank you so much! We will prepare
a series of posts to OCAML related mailing lists
and newsgroups to bring the good news. Everybody
please prepare to jump ship now. OCAML is the new
white and Jon Harrop is its holy evangelist.
Praise the Lambda! There will be a flood wave
of new users. Upgrade your machines to handle
the volume. Jon Harrop will need to upgrade his
bank account. Soon. I see it coming.
Thanks so much, Kenny!
Raffael Cavallaro
> f# -impediment: 2,410,000
> ocaml -impediment: 2,130,000
> lisp -impediment: 2,080,000
>
> Also, this is not true of the F# musical note:
>
> f# -note: 2,390,000
The phrases will of course be "F# Major" "F# Minor" and "music" not
just "note":
ocaml -speech -impediment -major -minor -music -note= 1,430,000
f# -speech -impediment -major -minor -music -note = 2,240,000
lisp -speech -impediment -major -minor -music -note = 2,390,000
Note that this excludes any hits for lisp AND music which itself pulls
in 2,180,000 hits.
We could play these silly games all day.
I know camls are often found in deserts - is that why c.l.f is such a
wasteland?
Rainer Joswig
<2007110412344616807-raffaelcavallaro@pasdespamsilvousplaitmaccom>,
Raffael Cavallaro
<raffaelcavallaro@pas-d'espam-s'il-vous-plait-mac.com> wrote:
my favorite search is
"ocaml application"=29 hits
Tim Bradshaw
> Tim Bradshaw wrote:
> > CL looks to be doing fine though compared to various other things:
> >http://www.tfeb.org/scratch/
>
> CL is as popular as JavaScript by that metric, which is clearly untrue.
Well, you know, that was kind of my point. Of the graphs I gave, one
was for C. Do you really think C is only twice as popular as CL? Do
you think *I* think that (hint, I'm a Unix SA)? None of these facile
mechanisms of establishing popularity mean much. Yours is just
utterly useless; mine could hope to give some kind of normalised rate
of change of popularity because I've chosen a metric which is known to
correspond to the language concerned (one would need to normalise by
some measure of non-spam usenet traffic which I suspect may be
declining however).
Never mind.
Frank Goenninger DG1SBG
> In article <4ymXi.12$w0...@newsfe08.lga>,
> Ken Tilton <kenny...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>> Rainer, you forgot to cross-post to c.l.f. This is as relevant there as
>> it is here! Glad to help, kzo
>
> Right, especially comp.lang.functional should know that
> there is this fantastic growth in OCAML. Lots
> of business opportunities. Thanks to Jon Harrop
> for this wonderful information. Jon, you are
> the hero of the Functional Programming community, tireless
> bringing the light to the morons living in the
> dark age. Thank you so much! We will prepare
> a series of posts to OCAML related mailing lists
> and newsgroups to bring the good news. Everybody
> please prepare to jump ship now. OCAML is the new
> white and Jon Harrop is its holy evangelist.
> Praise the Lambda! There will be a flood wave
> of new users. Upgrade your machines to handle
> the volume. Jon Harrop will need to upgrade his
> bank account. Soon. I see it coming.
>
> Thanks so much, Kenny!
If only Kenny set the crossposting to comp.*lang*.functional instead
of comp.lag.functional...
But hey, that little guy down there in Stuttgart is glad to help ...
;-)
--
Frank Goenninger
frgo(at)mac(dot)com
"Don't ask me! I haven't been reading comp.lang.lisp long enough to
really know ..."
Tim Bradshaw
> people with a borderline tourette syndrome,
Tourette's is a fucking requirement to post on cll.
> Jons
You owe the usenet oracle one apostrophe, or a six pints of your own
blood.
Tim Bradshaw
>
> The swamp resident was corrected the first time he posted this kind of
> meaningless comparison, but he is interested in propaganda, not truth.
> So he ignored the correction, and is back again saying the same thing.
I think it's worse (and sadder[*]) than that. For instance, if you're
using google groups, which is almost certainly by far the most likely
way of someone finding this stuff, look at the ratings that it assigns
to posters. You'll find that basically everyone gets 4 stars (you
have, I have: I haven't looked at your posting history, but my recent
history (in lisp newsgroups anyway) consists largely of bad jokes,
obscure self-referential jokes (I'm rather proud of my recent grammar
flame: I hope someone falls into the trap) and half-serious
suggestions that people I don't like should be killed). So, clearly,
if you don't get 4 stars or so, nothing you say should be taken
seriously, because even I get 4 stars. The frog has 2: catastrophe.
So he's not doing it for propaganda. He's doing it because, like many
of these people, he's ill. I don't have the time to work out what
goes wrong with these people, but it's a fairly common thing to happen
in one form or another. He's not the down-the-line case we've all
seen before (Ilias being a magnificent example from a while ago now),
but he clearly is one.
--tim
[*] Of course, I'm only saying it's sad to get sympathy. Really I
think he should be melted down for glue like the rest of them.
Slobodan Blazeski
> On Nov 2, 11:33 pm, Don Geddis <d...@geddis.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> > The swamp resident was corrected the first time he posted this kind of
> > meaningless comparison, but he is interested in propaganda, not truth.
> > So he ignored the correction, and is back again saying the same thing.
>
> I think it's worse (and sadder[*]) than that. For instance, if you're
> using google groups, which is almost certainly by far the most likely
> way of someone finding this stuff, look at the ratings that it assigns
> to posters. You'll find that basically everyone gets 4 stars (you
> have, I have: I haven't looked at your posting history, but my recent
> history (in lisp newsgroups anyway) consists largely of bad jokes,
> obscure self-referential jokes (I'm rather proud of my recent grammar
> flame: I hope someone falls into the trap) and half-serious
> suggestions that people I don't like should be killed). So, clearly,
> if you don't get 4 stars or so, nothing you say should be taken
> seriously, because even I get 4 stars. The frog has 2: catastrophe.
Q: How come the toad has 2 star ?
Hmm, because it's getting popular.
Nope, because it's rigged it's account and created a lot of imaginary
friends to gave him 5 stars.
Email address: use...@jdh30.plus.com
Average Rating: 2 stars (60 ratings)
http://groups.google.com/groups/profile?enc_user=I_YUthUAAACWD_8VFKtRU42NeunWF-drfMq7BcOOnMpM9MYZ86CqoA
Email address: j...@ffconsultancy.com
Average Rating: 1 star (1498 ratings)
http://groups.google.com/groups/profile?enc_user=I_YUthUAAACWD_8VFKtRU42NeunWF-drfMq7BcOOnMpM9MYZ86CqoA
cheers
Slobodan
Markus E L
Ken Tilton wrote:
>>.. defended the
>> right of JH (whom I often don't agree with) to post to c.l.l, even on
>> controversial topics, without being verbally assaulted and maligned by
>> people with a borderline tourette syndrome, doesn't make that a
>> "glowing testimonial".
>
> Probably was not you then, it was definitely glowing. Kind of a North
> Shore of Kaui sunset in winter glow. Glowing, definitely
> glowing. Google "glowing frog" maybe...
And on the other side - maybe not. Hardly believable that the
"character witness" for JH used the words "glowing frog".
>> It just makes a declaration about the open
>> character of Usenet: You're always free to use a news client which can
>> suppress Jons postings (or ignore them yourself if you don't want to
>> change your client).
>> BTW: You've been crossposting to c.l.f again.
>
> [Omigod, the dumbfuck thinks that was a mistake!]
No, certainly not. I know you. I suggest you talk to your doctor about
adjusting your medication. An increased dosage of haldol might help
you to overcome your urge for spontanous expostulation of obscenities
and swearing at people. It could help you to focus on arguments
instead of maligning others.
>>... Believe me: You and your
>> style of discussion are not wanted here. If it relieves the pressure
>> of compulsion, well, so be it, since we can't stop you anyway, but you
>> don't seriously believe that you get any useful discussion after such
>> a contribution, nor will you get rid of Jon (as experience should have
>> tought you). So why to you even try? I humbly suggest you stay away
>> from c.l.f with your kind of posting.
>> (And yes, this posting for once goes to c.l.l as well to make my
>> position on that quite clear...
>
> [I think he is starting to catch on.]
> I just want to make sure whoever wrote that glowing testimonial and
> then slinked away with his tail between his legs when cll pointed out
> to him that he had no idea how Harrop was behaving would learn
> painfully day in and day out tediously and obnoxiously how Harrop is
> behaving. Seems to be working.
> comp.lang.functional has Jon Harrop to thank for my presence, and so
Well, actually we have known Jon for a long time. You're delusional,
at least regarding your importance in the overall scheme of things.
> it will stay until... is it true frog's legs taste like chicken? Could
> we find out?
>
> Now excuse me while I go subscribe to c.l.f.
I'd prefer to excuse you while you took your medication.
-- M
Markus E L
Ken Tilton wrote:
> Markus E L wrote:
>> Markus E L wrote:
>>
>>>>Common Lisp is a good comparison because it is in slow but steady decline.
>>>
>>>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>>
>>>Why don't you use Cobol then? BTW, the method is questionable: I see
>> Please ignore me :-). I just noticed that I probably transplanted
>> this
>> thread from c.l.l to c.l.f. Since I don't post on c.l.l I can't very
>> well give an answer and certainly not at c.l.f which (I think) should
>> not be abused to wage wars that cannot be waged in c.l.l. So, em,
>> sorry.
>> Regards -- Markus
>
> So it is OK to encourage Toad Harrop on c.l.l but you /apologize/ for
> doing so here? I can see why you like his style of Usenet
> participation.
I apologize for responding on c.l.f to a post which only went to
c.l.l. Check you facts. And leave us alone, if possible.
> Instead of yelling at me with whom you have no influence, why don't
> you talk to Jonny boy about /his/ behavior? Oh, I forgot, he is a fine
> Usenet citizen....
>
> <sigh>
If I were afflicted like you, I'd also sigh. Deeply.
- M
And BTW: *Plonk*.
Jon Harrop
> Then you find mostly machine generated pages like
> messages from Debian.
Yes. That is true for most searches, which is why this is only an order of
magnitude estimate.
--
Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/ocaml_for_scientists/chapter1.html
Jon Harrop
> Well, you know, that was kind of my point. Of the graphs I gave, one
> was for C. Do you really think C is only twice as popular as CL? Do
> you think *I* think that (hint, I'm a Unix SA)? None of these facile
> mechanisms of establishing popularity mean much. Yours is just
> utterly useless; mine could hope to give some kind of normalised rate
> of change of popularity because I've chosen a metric which is known to
> correspond to the language concerned (one would need to normalise by
> some measure of non-spam usenet traffic which I suspect may be
> declining however).
On the contrary, people searching for "ocaml" on Google want to learn about
OCaml. The volume of posts on any usenet group is the "utterly useless"
metric. Counting the number of unique posters would be more relevant but it
still extremely biased by the fact that virtually nobody uses usenet.
--
Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
Ken Tilton
Damn! I was going to try to persuade Markus at least to admit that he
was a dork for defending himself from having glowed on the frog when in
fact as damien just quoted it was Ulf who defended amphibios as
productive and fascinating when the best comp.langs around are rife with
traffic trying to stomp out this vermin. c.l.lisp, c.l.c++... even an
msn c## group reveals people putting up frog traps to rid themselves of
Dr. Jon Harrop.
But as someone, else noted, all in all this is an occasion for
compassion, for Jon obviously has issues, and clearly The Real Problem
is dummies everywhere who read his nonsense and think, Oh! I know what
to say that will really put him in his place! Fool me once, shame on
you, fool me twice, shame on me, and I am a little scared to think what
might be the penalty for the bozos falling for Jon's baiting time and
again like so many -- what was that, Samantha? -- dumb monkeys?
[btw, Samantha, my dev team is /not/ pleased with your comment -- not
one of them has even considered responding to His Jonness.]
kzo
Don Geddis
> ocaml -speech -impediment -major -minor -music -note= 1,430,000
> f# -speech -impediment -major -minor -music -note = 2,240,000
> lisp -speech -impediment -major -minor -music -note = 2,390,000
Do you guys even look at these results pages?
The biggest homonym for F# isn't in the music domain. It's expletives.
It appears that the majority of Google hits for F# are things like "F#$%",
"F#*K", etc.
You're a long way from even having a ballpark figure of the use of these
terms as computer languages, on the web.
-- Don
_______________________________________________________________________________
Don Geddis http://don.geddis.org/ d...@geddis.org
Hail to the sun god, he sure is a fun god, Ra, Ra, Ra!
Nicolas Neuss
I guess also this information could be interesting for
You-can-call-me-a-troll Leypold.
Nicolas
Sverker Wiberg
> He says that guitars have frets which makes them "note safe",
If you do want "note safety" you could implement it yourself by tying on
vihuela/viola da gamba-style frets (and take them off whenever you want
a standard violin again). Another nice thing; the frets end up wherever
*you* want them, instead of where the builder decides to put them ---
but I'm sure the guitaristas will tell you that that is bad.
> and any
> instrument that isn't "note safe" is terribly out of date.
Naaah. They're just different. A neolithic bone flute is "note safe",
while a modern-day theremin is not.
/Sverker
Ulf Wiger
>
> Damn! I was going to try to persuade Markus at least to admit that he
> was a dork for defending himself from having glowed on the frog when in
> fact as damien just quoted it was Ulf who defended amphibios as
> productive and fascinating when the best comp.langs around are rife with
> traffic trying to stomp out this vermin. c.l.lisp, c.l.c++... even an
> msn c## group reveals people putting up frog traps to rid themselves of
> Dr. Jon Harrop.
I wrote:
"I have no quarrel with Jon, and people for whom I have the
highest regard have praised some of his work. That goes
a fair way in my book"
In your book, that may be a glowing testimonial...
Personally, I prefer to be judged on exactly what I write.
Every single word in that sentence was chosen with care.
I have heard Jon being commended by people whom I would give
a glowing testimonial any day of the week and twice on Sunday.
I will not name them, since I doubt they would appreciate
being dragged into this mud-slinging contest.
BR,
Ulf W
Ken Tilton
Jon is a pest here and on other groups, and you supported him. You were
the one who responded to my joking "how did you get rid of him" with
"why would we want to get rid of him?", said he was fine, repeating the
praise even more strongly above. You and Markus have a lot of energy for
whining about my cross-posting his great behavior to c.l.f, why don't
you instead take the hint, withdraw your support of Jon's behavior and
take him aside for an e-chat?
Why do you and Markus support Jon despoiling c.l.l and other sites but
complain about me cross-posting the furor to c.l.f? Is that because you
do not read the other groups? If so, well, I do, so you should not be
puzzled by my reaction. Is it because his behavior is Ok for c.l.l but
not c.l.f because c.l.f is a higher-class group? What is it? Why are
you upset at me, not upset at Jon, and positively supporting Jon?
kt
Raffael Cavallaro
> You're a long way from even having a ballpark figure of the use of these
> terms as computer languages, on the web.
that's the whole point - you can tweak the search terms to provide any
"evidence" you want
Ulf Wiger
(After this, I will not respond to anymore follow-ups in this
thread.)
Ken Tilton wrote:
>
> Jon is a pest here and on other groups, and you supported him.
It's funny how some parts of your posts are completely ignored
while others are given huge importance, no matter what you do
to try to correct it.
> You were the one who responded to my joking "how did you get rid
> of him" with "why would we want to get rid of him?",
> said he was fine, repeating the praise even more strongly above.
I allowed myself to be provoked by your willfully insulting
tone in an otherwise reasonably interesting thread, which btw
had nothing to do with Jon Harrop (he did participate, but as
far as I could tell, none of his posts were provocative). Since
I was already annoyed by your admission of abusing others for
your own amusement, I took the bait about Jon as well, not
because I have any particular reason to defend him, but because
I strongly dislike ad-hominem campaigns, and especially when
they come with implications that you haven't made yourself
useful until you've joined the bashing.
One of the things I do not want to be part of is speaking
ill of a third person in a public forum. If you want to say
something about another person, you either say it with respect,
or address that person directly. We all have different sore
spots, I guess. To me, insulting and maligning others is far
worse than posting O.T. or resorting to shameless plugs.
> You and Markus have a lot of energy for
> whining about my cross-posting his great behavior to c.l.f,
> why don't you instead take the hint, withdraw your support
> of Jon's behavior and take him aside for an e-chat?
I have never voiced an opinion about his behaviour on c.l.l.
and have even been pretty clear about the fact that I'm not
going to. I did spend time browsing articles on c.l.l. to get
a feeling for the apparent controversy. I got the impression
that c.l.l. accepts language that is not accepted in c.l.f.,
and is practically unheard of on the erlang-questions mailing
list, which is the public forum that gets the most of my
attention. I don't have a problem with this, as I can choose
which forums I want to frequent. But this means that I will
refrain from passing judgment on people's behaviour in
forums that I'm not familiar with.
> Is it because his behavior is Ok for c.l.l but
> not c.l.f because c.l.f is a higher-class group?
Just different. It's not a question of better or worse,
but rather a cultural difference. What passes unnoticed
in some cultures can be a stoning offense in others.
BR,
Ulf W
Ken Tilton
Nice try, counsellor, casting the spammer somehow as a "victim being
singled out for abuse". That is pretty clever spin, sorry I have to
expose it.
The only reason I got involved is because Jon is driving so many /other/
c.l.l denizens to distraction with his deliberately irritating and
provocative posts about C++ or Lisp or whatever being in decline, and
they cannot figure out that the best response is none, so c.l.l ends up
polluted with your boy's noise. Jon ignores or mocks attempts to
discourage him, as I already pointed out taunting someone so frustrated
they reported him to some agency or other.
And you want to spin that out as Kenny singling out Jon? As if.
I am starting to worry about you, Ulf, but you are joining Jon in my
killfile so as long as you can stop your irritating habit of also
emailing me your transparent defenses of Jon I won't worry much more.
kzo
Markus E L
Nicolas Neuss wrote:
My impression is, that you and your cronies are trying to wage a
general war against c.l.f because you can't stomach that you can't
solicite support for your wars against JH here. You've been warned NOT
to push threads from c.l.l to c.l.f that have been started in c.l.l,
don't belong to c.l.f and are disruptive in nature. You didn't heed
it.
We will see now how well the abuse complaint system works, even for
PDs. Fortunately the university of Stuttgart is inside of German
jurisdiction.
It's beyond my understanding how somebody who presumably has a
scientific career to care for can afford to engage in your kind of
behaviour in a medium which will be archived for the next umpteenth
years.
Regards -- Markus
Markus E L
Tim Bradshaw wrote:
> On Nov 3, 10:43 am, Markus E L
>> people with a borderline tourette syndrome,
>
> Tourette's is a fucking requirement to post on cll.
It seems like that. Actually I'm recanting: Tourette's is a terrible
afflication for those who have it. Having an organic basis it actually
"imprisons" an often very thoughtful, creative and valuable person
under a load of tics. It does those people an injustice to compare
them to people who are just socially ill adapted and inable to
communicate and have no illness as an excuse. Just look for the posts
with the most expletives in them and you know whom I mean. Not all
posters to c.l.l exhibit that behaviour, but you certainly got a nice
team of rioters there. If possible, keep them there. Thanks.
Regards -- Markus
Don Geddis
> If you want to say something about another person, you either say it with
> respect, or address that person directly.
This approach was attempted numerous times to the amphibian in question,
all with absolutely no results. Not even acknowledgement.
At first glance, postings from the swamp appear reasonable. But long
experience has shown c.l.l that there is no interest in truth from the
mud and muck, only propaganda and advertising. Hence: spammer.
Which is all the more frustrating when people like you attempt to take the
"reasonable" tone of assuming the best intentions, instead of the worst.
We've been through that path before. It doesn't end well (for us).
-- Don
_______________________________________________________________________________
Don Geddis http://don.geddis.org/ d...@geddis.org
Chu P'ing-man spent a thousand in gold and three years learning dragon killing
from Hunchback Yi only to learn there was no place for him to practice his art.
Nicolas Neuss
writes:
> Nicolas Neuss wrote:
>
> We will see now how well the abuse complaint system works, even for
> PDs. Fortunately the university of Stuttgart is inside of German
> jurisdiction.
Sorry? Which abuse are you speaking about? Wasn't it you who wrote in
<http://groups.google.ca/group/comp.lang.lisp/msg/70bee58f08bfa18c>
the nice line
"Call me a troll. :-) You wouldn't be the first one."
I only do what you apparently want...
Nicolas
F.Bel...@gmail.com
> Ulf Wiger <ulf.wi...@e-r-i-c-s-s-o-n.com> wrote on Tue, 06 Nov 2007:
>
> > If you want to say something about another person, you either say it with
> > respect, or address that person directly.
>
> This approach was attempted numerous times to the amphibian in question,
> all with absolutely no results. Not even acknowledgement.
The question that comes to mind is the following: Has the "other"
approach, i.e., the one you seem to be advocating here, yielded better
results in the past? If not, perhaps being more civil would tend to
have its own merits, independent of whether or not it "works" on JH.
Just an outsider opinion...
Cheers,
F.
Markus E L
Ah, thanks, the voice of sanity. Sometimes it takes a third party to
see the obvious.
Regards -- Markus
Don Geddis
> On Nov 6, 11:31 am, Don Geddis <d...@geddis.org> wrote:
>> Ulf Wiger <ulf.wi...@e-r-i-c-s-s-o-n.com> wrote on Tue, 06 Nov 2007:
>> > If you want to say something about another person, you either say it with
>> > respect, or address that person directly.
>>
>> This approach was attempted numerous times to the amphibian in question,
>> all with absolutely no results. Not even acknowledgement.
>
> The question that comes to mind is the following: Has the "other"
> approach, i.e., the one you seem to be advocating here, yielded better
> results in the past?
Not for the troll himself, no.
The issue is that the troll feeds on people taking him at face value, and
posting followup after followup. So the hope is that widespread common
knowledge about the nature of the troll would reduce the number of honest
posters who get sucked into the threads.
> If not, perhaps being more civil would tend to have its own merits,
> independent of whether or not it "works" on JH.
But then you have either an unending series of heartfelt corrections to the
misinformation (always ignored), or perhaps worse you leave the erroneous
statements unchallenged, and lurking readers assume the false information
has widespread agreement.
There really isn't an easy fix. Educating normal people about the spammer
nature of the postings is the current approach. And is hampered by people
(generally new to the party) who think we're being unfair to a guest.
-- Don
_______________________________________________________________________________
Don Geddis http://don.geddis.org/ d...@geddis.org
We are soulless bags of walking meat and water, doomed to toil in misery.
F.Bel...@gmail.com
> There really isn't an easy fix. Educating normal people about the spammer
> nature of the postings is the current approach. And is hampered by people
> (generally new to the party) who think we're being unfair to a guest.
Hmm, I'm just not so sure if the cure isn't perhaps worse than the
disease here...
F.
Ken Tilton
Uh, the obvious to me is that we do not know yet. If Harrop never
despoils c.l.l again then my plan of sharing his deliberate asininity
with the one NG he treats with respect will have worked, but this will
be yielding better results in the future, not in the past. If OTOH he
fails to live up to the high opinion you and Ulf have of him and
continues to ignore the c.l.l's often courteously-phrased requests to
cease and desist his deliberate spamming then we will know my policy of
sharing that behavior with c.l.f has failed but again in the future. So
there is no past failure, this is something new, and if it fails you and
Ulf will know never to ask us again why we would want to be rid of him
because you too will want us to be rid of him so you can be rid of me.
You have met the enemy, and he is one of you.
hth, kzo
Ken Tilton
How much do you know about the disease? The jonjerk has been a plague on
c.l.l for months. You have seen a week of the admittedly unfortunate
cure, you might not be the best judge.
What I see is a bunch of c.l.f finger-shakers responding to an
admittedly noxious Harrop spillover by asking why c.l.l simply does not
build a higher retaining wall.
We did, we're trying something new. Well, I am. :)
kzo
Paul Rubin
> So there is no past failure, this is something new, and if it
> fails you and Ulf will know never to ask us again why we would want to
> be rid of him because you too will want us to be rid of him so you can
> be rid of me.
But getting rid of you is easy, using a client side filter. Bye.
Joachim Durchholz
> Educating normal people about the spammer
> nature of the postings is the current approach.
I have seen you calling names ("amphibian"). That's not educational,
that's just flamage, and one of the criteria that can make somebody an
inhabitant of my killfile.
In fact the list of inhabitants and candidates for my killfile is
exclusively made up of c.l.l. members. I think you guys have a flamage
problem over there.
I suggest considering making the newsgroup moderated, or setting up
comp.lang.lisp.moderated. It's the best cure for this kind of problem.
Regards,
Jo
jos...@corporate-world.lisp.de
We just request that Jon Harrop accepts that comp.lang.lisp is not
there for his
spamming activities. We don't need to turn comp.lang.lisp to a
moderated newsgroup
just because one individual is abusing the newsgroup. Sure, he has
been banned
on Wikipedia, on IRC channels he gets 'kicked' and on Lambda the
Ultimate
he has been warned that his posts might get moderated. comp.lang.lisp
is an open forum, and it is a bit difficult to deal with such an
abuse.
But that is not the problem of comp.lang.lisp, it is the problem of
Jon Harrop who has been posting lies and advertizings. He has no
interest in Lisp at all, the criteria for a useful
participation in comp.lang.lisp. Criticism is fine, controversy too,
but plain spamming is not. His topics may be on-topic for
comp.lang.functional,
they are off-topic for comp.lang.lisp. OCAML, OCAML services, OCAML
libraries, OCAML consulting, F# at Microsoft, etc. is totally
irrelevant
for a Lisp newsgroup. If comp.lang.functional likes to see commercial
announcements and language advocacy for Functional Programming,
then the best place Mr. Harrop can use is comp.lang.functional .
But what he wants at comp.lang.lisp is to advertize his business
offerings - though this is not the only newsgroup he did that.
He got a little 'famous' for his spamming activities.
If he continues to do that, even though he has multiple
times been explained to stop that, he should not wonder
that the tone gets more aggressive.
Jon Harrop
> If he continues to do that, even though he has multiple times been
> explained to stop that, he should not wonder that the tone gets more
I can understand these delusions of grandeur but I cannot understand why you
would lie about me just before you accuse me of lying:
> Sure, he has been banned on Wikipedia...
Not true.
> on IRC channels he gets 'kicked'...
Also not true.
> it is the problem of Jon Harrop who has been posting lies...
Do you not think it is hugely damaging to your own position to conjure up
such flawed arguments?
David B. Benson
> On Nov 7, 11:45 pm, Joachim Durchholz <j...@durchholz.org> wrote:
> If comp.lang.functional likes to see commercial
> announcements and language advocacy for Functional Programming,
> then the best place Mr. Harrop can use is comp.lang.functional .
I don't mind so long as it is tasteful and non-repetious. Jon is one
of only a few attempting to make a living via functional programming.
It is of some interest to learn what he is doing and attempt to
understand why he prefers features that I find abhorently dangereous
(in a setting of embedded computing, for example).
David B. Benson
> If comp.lang.functional likes to see commercial
> announcements and language advocacy for Functional Programming,
> then the best place Mr. Harrop can use is comp.lang.functional .
Don Geddis
> Don Geddis schrieb:
>> Educating normal people about the spammer nature of the postings is the
>> current approach.
>
> I have seen you calling names ("amphibian"). That's not educational, that's
> just flamage
Not true. You've missed the context of the problem.
c.l.l eventually realized that the real motivation of the spammer was to get
long threads, where he could repeat his signature and advertising and name,
in some (vain? successful?) attempt to drive up further business to his
consultancy, at the cost of degrading the commons which is the c.l.l
newsgroup.
Those of us who use c.l.l to actually discuss Lisp, realized that even the
mere mention of his true name was believed by him to be sufficiently valuable
that it would cause more postings. So a deliberate attempt was made to stop
conjuring his presence by using his real name. Hence the euphemisms.
It's not a big step from there to choosing an ironic euphemism, in a play
on words on the name of his consulting company. "Amphibian" was not an
insult, but merely a token reminding anyone in the know of "frog", which
itself is part of the real name of the spammer (or at least his company).
Similarly, his preferred language has been given euphemistic names.
My favorite, from the ones I've seen, is "Irish ship of the desert".
Both are intended as jokes, as a way to refer to the spammer and his chosen
language without citing either by name. Neither is intended as an actual
meaningful insult.
Does that help clear it up for you?
-- Don
_______________________________________________________________________________
Don Geddis http://don.geddis.org/ d...@geddis.org
Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and
looks like work. -- Thomas A. Edison
Vesa Karvonen
[...]
> Does that help clear it up for you?
Yes it does! I've been wondering for some time about his motivation
for posting google stats repeatedly (on c.l.l). Indeed, your
explanation explains his behavior.
-Vesa Karvonen
Markus E L
'F DOT Bellheim AT gmail DOT com' wrote:
Especially if the cure doesn't work. Still: Can anybody of the
"doctors" answer to me why the cure spilled over to c.l.f. I still see
no reason - except a certain spitefulness against c.l.f. Why?
- Markus
Markus E L
Don Geddis wrote:
> There really isn't an easy fix.
> Educating normal people about the spammer
> nature of the postings is the current approach.
If you call the expletive filled postings of KT and those of NN
"educating", your idea of education differs largely from mine.
> And is hampered by people (generally new to the party) who think
> we're being unfair to a guest.
You know, you don't have more rights at c.l.l than Jon. You're just
the same as he: Someone posting to c.l.l. A guest. You don't own
c.l.l. Still: I'd leave that problem to the c.l.l netizens to solve
(wether they want you or Ken doing the police there) if you kindly
left c.l.f alone. You got your hampering opposition now, only because
you tried to extend your stupid fight (and your bad behaviour) to
c.l.f. I'm only ever reading c.l.f. Ask yourself: Why is that pesky ML
meddling again? Well -- because Ken and Nicolas couldn't leave c.l.f
well alone.
My suggestion: Don't do a follow up on this post. Don't ever begin
(again) to crosspost responses in your stupid war to c.l.f and people
from c.l.f will leave you alone trying your new educational methods
with Jon (but my ommiseration: From my point of view it looks as if
anybody will have to learn something in this, it will be you (and Ken
and Nicolas - BTW Rainer has not crossposted to c.l.f yet in this
thread, so there is hope that people, even if the don't make peace
learn at least to keep truce - if they are able to learn at all).
- M
Markus E L
Ken Tilton wrote:
> F.Bel...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Nov 6, 5:36 pm, Don Geddis <d...@geddis.org> wrote:
>>
>>>There really isn't an easy fix. Educating normal people about the spammer
>>>nature of the postings is the current approach. And is hampered by people
>>>(generally new to the party) who think we're being unfair to a guest.
>> Hmm, I'm just not so sure if the cure isn't perhaps worse than the
>> disease here...
>
> How much do you know about the disease? The jonjerk has been a plague
> on c.l.l for months. You have seen a week of the admittedly
> unfortunate cure, you might not be the best judge.
Only we didn't have the disease here. If you were a doctor, you'd get
sued for malpractice for sure.
> What I see is a bunch of c.l.f finger-shakers responding to an
> admittedly noxious Harrop spillover by asking why c.l.l simply does
> not build a higher retaining wall.
>
> We did, we're trying something new. Well, I am. :)
Yes, involving people far far away and taking hostages. Well, since
you're obviously admitting to your misdeeds, it turned out you did all
this puposely and there is no promise of betterment, I think we can as
well have a try how abuse AT cv DOT net works, can't we?
Regards -- Markus
Markus E L
Ken Tilton wrote:
The logic of hijackers and psychopaths. Why don't you just get on the
street and take a hostage? You would have gotten the same good
reasons.
How you're reasoning now convinces me that you're seriously
deranged. Let's hope your "partners in crime so far" see this and drop
you like the hot potato you are. On the other side this is usenet:
There seems to be no spleen for which one can't find some peers there.
- M
Markus E L
'joswig AT corporate-world DOT lisp DOT de' wrote:
> On Nov 7, 11:45 pm, Joachim Durchholz <j...@durchholz.org> wrote:
>> Don Geddis schrieb:
>>
>> > Educating normal people about the spammer
>> > nature of the postings is the current approach.
>>
>> I have seen you calling names ("amphibian"). That's not educational,
>> that's just flamage, and one of the criteria that can make somebody an
>> inhabitant of my killfile.
>>
>> In fact the list of inhabitants and candidates for my killfile is
>> exclusively made up of c.l.l. members. I think you guys have a flamage
>> problem over there.
>> I suggest considering making the newsgroup moderated, or setting up
>> comp.lang.lisp.moderated. It's the best cure for this kind of problem.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Jo
>
> We just request that Jon Harrop accepts that comp.lang.lisp is not
> there for his
> spamming activities. We don't need to turn comp.lang.lisp to a
And we just request that you refrain from CC'ing your (bloody) flame
wars with JH to c.l.f. Ist that so difficult to understand? I'm quite
sure, Jo didn't go to c.l.l and put people from there into his
killfile. I'm quite sure he only put people from c.l.l into the
killfile who came to c.l.f with a (bloody) c.l.l flame war.
So it's simply irrelevant what you're requesting. Simply stop it. Do
it in c.l.l as much as you like: But what do we in c.l.f care for what
you in c.l.l request, flame or exurgitate? Why should we, Rainer? Your
comment is just ignoring the situation.
> moderated newsgroup
> just because one individual is abusing the newsgroup. Sure, he has
> been banned
> on Wikipedia, on IRC channels he gets 'kicked' and on Lambda the
> Ultimate
> he has been warned that his posts might get moderated. comp.lang.lisp
> is an open forum, and it is a bit difficult to deal with such an
> abuse.
> But that is not the problem of comp.lang.lisp, it is the problem of
Unfortunately due to your, Ken's and Nicolas' activities this has also
become a c.l.f problem. And know what: Here it's the c.l.l activists
that have become the problem. So go away (or do you suggest we try the
same kind of cure with you (plural) as you tried with JH?).
- M
David B. Benson
> If comp.lang.functional likes to see commercial
> announcements and language advocacy for Functional Programming,
> then the best place Mr. Harrop can use is comp.lang.functional .
I don't mind so long as it is tasteful and non-repitious. Jon is one
of only a few attempting to make a living via functional programming.
It is of some interest to learn what he is doind and attempt to
Edi Weitz
> And we just request that you refrain from CC'ing your (bloody) flame
> wars with JH to c.l.f. Ist that so difficult to understand?
>
> [...]
>
> So it's simply irrelevant what you're requesting. Simply stop it.
>
> [...]
>
> So go away
May I quote what you just replied to Don?
"You know, you don't have more rights at c.l.l than Jon. You're just
the same as he: Someone posting to c.l.l. A guest. You don't own
c.l.l."
But /you/ have more rights on c.l.f than Rainer? You're not just a
guest, but you own it? Or are you just morally superior? Or are the
rules for c.l.f different from the rules for c.l.l because it's
inhabited by better human beings?
I'd suggest that you simply get off your high horse.
Edi.
--
Lisp is not dead, it just smells funny.
Real email: (replace (subseq "spam...@agharta.de" 5) "edi")
Duane Rettig
<development-2006-8...@ANDTHATm-e-leypold.de> writes:
>> But that is not the problem of comp.lang.lisp, it is the problem of
>
> Unfortunately due to your, Ken's and Nicolas' activities this has also
> become a c.l.f problem. And know what: Here it's the c.l.l activists
> that have become the problem. So go away (or do you suggest we try the
> same kind of cure with you (plural) as you tried with JH?).
It looks like you're already trying the same kind of cure. How's that
working out for you?
I'm not an "activist", and I don't care much about what Jon Harrop
posts; I simply ignore most of what he says. But it seems you've now
turned me into an activist, in order to point out the hypocrasy of
your condemnation. It would be better for you to heed your own advice
and just stop.
--
Duane Rettig du...@franz.com Franz Inc. http://www.franz.com/
555 12th St., Suite 1450 http://www.555citycenter.com/
Oakland, Ca. 94607 Phone: (510) 452-2000; Fax: (510) 452-0182