[plt-scheme] Re: On C#

On 5/22/07, Paulo J. Matos <pocm at soton.ac.uk> wrote:
> On 5/22/07, Robert Nikander <nikander at nc.rr.com> wrote:
> > Paulo J. Matos wrote:
> > >
> > > Then I suggested PLTScheme or if people are against it, Ocaml.
> > >
> > > After a lot of discussion Ocaml was scratched. C# and PLTScheme were
> >
> > Are you aware of F#?  It's basically OCaml for .NET, from Microsoft
> > Research.  I used it recently and was impressed.  It has some support
> > for Visual Studio 'intellisense', but it's not as polished as the C# stuff.
> >
>
> Yes, in fact, one of the M$ devs were here recently talking about it.
> Unfortunately, nobody liked it much.
>

OK, I should be more concise. It's not the truth that people didn't
like it so we didn't consider it further. Some people liked it, others
didn't (2 of the 6 I think). However, it was directly put apart for
two reasons, one is that is a microsoft language, the second is that
people running linux and mac also want to develop and as far as we
know, there's no compiler for it yet in these systems. So, no further
investigation was needed.

> Anyway, my opinion is go with PLT Scheme. After the demo, we'll see if
> I convince them! :-)
>
> > Rob
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Paulo Jorge Matos - pocm at soton.ac.uk
> http://www.personal.soton.ac.uk/pocm
> PhD Student @ ECS
> University of Southampton, UK
>


-- 
Paulo Jorge Matos - pocm at soton.ac.uk
http://www.personal.soton.ac.uk/pocm
PhD Student @ ECS
University of Southampton, UK