Lwt informal user survey

Community
1

In order to make some decisions relating to the maintenance of Lwt, I’d like to know a little bit more about how the library is used in the wild. Do not hesitate to respond to the poll and/or as a message in this thread, or even to contact me via other means in case discuss is not your jam.

What versions of the OCaml compiler do you use Lwt with?

  • 4.02
  • 4.03
  • 4.04
  • 4.05
  • 4.06
  • 4.07
  • 4.08
  • 4.09
  • 4.10
  • 4.11
  • 4.12
  • 4.13
  • 5.0
  • custom fork, other
  • js_of_ocaml
  • null

0 voters

What OS do you run your Lwt projects on?

  • Linux
  • *BSD
  • MacOS/OSX
  • Windows
  • iOS
  • Android
  • Mirage
  • web browser
  • other(s)
  • null

0 voters

What version of Lwt do you use?

  • 2.*
  • 3.*
  • 4.*
  • 5.0
  • 5.1
  • 5.2
  • 5.3
  • 5.4
  • 5.5
  • custom fork, other
  • null

0 voters

Three wishes, go

  • More stdlib-like features (fancier Lwt_list, Lwt_seq, etc., added Lwt_fun, Lwt_string, etc.)
  • More concurrency widgets (more synchronisation primitives and the like)
  • More integration with OCaml.5
  • Better syntax extension
  • Better debugging and profiling tools and support
  • More documentation and tutorials
  • A more modern API
  • 1000 wishes obviously
  • null

0 voters

10 Likes
3

Thanks to everyone who took the time to answer the polls above. I’ve now closed them.

The first pull-request to come out of this poll is [Drop support for old ocaml versions by raphael-proust · Pull Request #947 · ocsigen/lwt · GitHub](removing support for OCaml<=4.07). This was the cutoff in the poll. It removes a lot of #if preprocessing statements and a few workarounds to stay compatible with old Stdlib interfaces. Thanks to @hannes for contributing most of the commits on this pull-request.
If support for OCaml<=4.07 is important to you, please participate in the pull-request’s discussion or on this thread.

Stay tuned for more. (But also be patient.)

5 Likes