From: skaller <skaller@users.sourceforge.net>
To: Radu Grigore <radugrigore@gmail.com>
Cc: caml-list <caml-list@inria.fr>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] assertions or exceptions?
Date: 16 Jul 2004 02:24:51 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1089908691.29648.616.camel@pelican.wigram> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7f8e92aa04071506453ef7345d@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, 2004-07-15 at 23:45, Radu Grigore wrote:
> Those solutions are:
> 1. use another library
> 2. provide your own workaround (by redesigning the interface)
> I fail to see how this vindicates the design of the standard library.
I believe there is a good argument for using exceptions
in the standard library. It goes like this:
There are situation where a function call can fail.
Perhaps here an exception is not as good as a sum type.
But there are other situations where it can be proven
a function call cannot fail. In these circumstances,
using exceptions leads to simpler and more efficient
code: the downside is you have to manually maintain
the proof that an exception can't be thrown in the
face of the changes software always goes through.
In balance, it is probably fairly arbitrary which
mechanism to present the client.
Ocaml is reasonably consistent though, and that
is probably what matters most.
--
John Skaller, mailto:skaller@users.sf.net
voice: 061-2-9660-0850,
snail: PO BOX 401 Glebe NSW 2037 Australia
Checkout the Felix programming language http://felix.sf.net
-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-07-15 16:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-07-15 8:03 Radu Grigore
2004-07-15 10:18 ` Richard Jones
2004-07-15 10:28 ` Daniel Andor
2004-07-15 12:49 ` Radu Grigore
2004-07-15 13:33 ` Richard Jones
2004-07-15 13:58 ` Radu Grigore
2004-07-16 18:53 ` Aleksey Nogin
2004-07-17 2:55 ` John Prevost
2004-07-17 14:24 ` David MENTRE
2004-07-15 12:35 ` Jon Harrop
2004-07-15 13:45 ` Radu Grigore
2004-07-15 14:33 ` Jon Harrop
2004-07-15 15:05 ` Radu Grigore
2004-07-15 16:24 ` skaller [this message]
2004-07-15 15:38 ` [Caml-list] Unboxing options, was " Brian Hurt
2004-07-15 16:25 ` John Hughes
2004-07-15 17:00 ` Brian Hurt
2004-07-15 17:20 ` John Prevost
2004-07-15 19:14 ` Radu Grigore
2004-07-15 19:56 ` John Carr
2004-07-15 20:48 ` Brian Hurt
2004-07-15 20:49 ` John Carr
2004-07-15 21:15 ` John Prevost
2004-07-15 21:15 ` Karl Zilles
2004-07-15 21:26 ` Brian Hurt
2004-07-15 21:04 ` John Prevost
2004-07-15 21:17 ` skaller
2004-07-15 21:35 ` Brian Hurt
2004-07-15 21:51 ` skaller
2004-07-15 21:42 ` skaller
2004-07-16 0:35 ` Jacques GARRIGUE
2004-07-16 1:03 ` John Prevost
2004-07-16 2:00 ` Jacques GARRIGUE
2004-07-16 16:40 ` Xavier Leroy
2004-07-19 8:58 ` Damien Doligez
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1089908691.29648.616.camel@pelican.wigram \
--to=skaller@users.sourceforge.net \
--cc=caml-list@inria.fr \
--cc=radugrigore@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox