MLTon paper

[Jagannathan, Suresh]

Dear Simon:

Thanks very much for you offer to have us submit a paper on MLton to JFP.
We're
very excited by the possibility.  Since all of us are distributed and
working 
(at least part of the time) on other projects, we're still unsure about a
specific
date by which we could have the paper to you, but we hope to start writing
soon.  We believe the paper that would be of most interest to your readers
would be one that discussed ramifications of whole-program compilation, the
implications of using simple typed ILs (especially translating to SSA), etc.
Essentially, our thinking is to focus less on foundations and benchmarks and
more on design tradeoffs and decisions within this context.  We hope that
would be ok with you.

Thanks again,

Henry, Matthew, Suresh, and Steve


-----Original Message-----
From: Simon Peyton-Jones [mailto:simonpj@microsoft.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2002 10:12 AM
To: sweeks@intertrust.com; fluet@cs.cornell.edu;
sjagannathan@storagenetworks.com; henry@sourcelight.com
Cc: Simon Peyton-Jones; wadler@avaya.com
Subject: MLTon paper


Stephen, Suresh, Matthew, Henry,

When Stephen and I met at ICFP01, I believe that I invited you
to write a paper about MLton for the Journal of Functional Programming.
You have done all this excellent implementation stuff; now's the time
to infect people's brains, as well as their hard disks, with your ideas!

Seriously, I was thinking that you probably now have enough 
experience and perspective for the main design choices that
you made in MLton that a paper surveying the compiler as a whole
would be very valuable: 
its structure and major design choices, the things you think work
really well and the things you wish you'd done differently, and so on.

Conferences tend to encourage tightly-focussed papers, but
journals can take papers with a wider focus and more general lessons.

Would you be interested?  

Simon