From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from weis@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id KAA26131 for caml-red; Tue, 21 Nov 2000 10:13:50 +0100 (MET) Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id VAA13131 for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2000 21:44:05 +0100 (MET) Received: from cepheus.azstarnet.com (cepheus.azstarnet.com [169.197.56.195]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.10.0) with ESMTP id eAKKi3f08721 for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2000 21:44:04 +0100 (MET) Received: from dylan (dialup002ip379.tus.azstarnet.com [169.197.15.123]) by cepheus.azstarnet.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id NAA14537 for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2000 13:43:47 -0700 (MST) X-Sent-via: StarNet http://www.azstarnet.com/ Message-ID: <01e501c05332$9e924470$210148bf@dylan> From: "David McClain" To: Subject: Re: Real excellent object oriented source code examples of Ocaml Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 13:43:47 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Sender: weis@pauillac.inria.fr ... in response to Xavier... But as someone who learned to appreciate what CLOS had to offer over the conventional Smalltalk style of OO, and as an avid user of OCaml, I have to say that I really miss CLOS sometimes... I have implemented several large OCaml programs, and I ended up using OO only sparingly to support a simple hierarchy of COM/OLE encapsulator objects. So I don't really have any particular example of need for CLOS. I just miss its elegant beauty sometimes. Every now and again I sit and write some Lisp/CLOS just so that I can enjoy the experience. Call me crazy, but I love functional closures, pattern matching, efficient tail recursion, etc., etc. Of course some of these are missing in Common Lisp and so I also write a great deal of OCaml just so I can experience its special pleasures... - DM