From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 Received: from mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.83]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23C22BC6C for ; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 18:30:42 +0100 (CET) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgAAACOgnUfAXQInh2dsb2JhbACQKgEBAQgKKZsH X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.25,260,1199660400"; d="scan'208";a="6666103" Received: from concorde.inria.fr ([192.93.2.39]) by mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 28 Jan 2008 18:30:42 +0100 Received: from mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.82]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id m0SHUf77009311 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=OK) for ; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 18:30:41 +0100 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgAAACOgnUfBMVMPh2dsb2JhbACQKgEBAQgKKZsH X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.25,260,1199660400"; d="scan'208";a="7340106" Received: from kabis.univ-orleans.fr (HELO ka.univ-orleans.fr) ([193.49.83.15]) by mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 28 Jan 2008 18:30:41 +0100 Received: from smtps.univ-orleans.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ka.univ-orleans.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35CC312AE91; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 18:30:41 +0100 (CET) Received: from [192.168.0.12] (ras75-4-82-235-58-110.fbx.proxad.net [82.235.58.110]) by smtps.univ-orleans.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7CAE36E5B; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 18:30:43 +0100 (CET) Subject: Re: [Caml-list] [OSR] OCaml Standard Recommandation Process From: David Teller To: Brian Hurt Cc: Jon Harrop , caml-list@inria.fr In-Reply-To: <479E04E6.5000303@janestcapital.com> References: <1201440183.6302.27.camel@Blefuscu> <200801281204.00689.jon@ffconsultancy.com> <479DE545.9050306@janestcapital.com> <200801281525.12651.jon@ffconsultancy.com> <479E04E6.5000303@janestcapital.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 18:30:40 +0100 Message-Id: <1201541440.6747.68.camel@Blefuscu> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.12.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 479E1141.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail . ensmp . fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; ocaml:01 univ-orleans:01 monads:01 camlp:01 ocaml:01 cheers:01 monads:01 univ-orleans:01 lifo:01 'try:98 liquidations:98 garbage:01 garbage:01 wrote:01 caml-list:01 A few things here: * we can provide two libraries, one with monads and one without, and let users choose whichever they use * it's quite easy to build a generic resource-disposal facility on par with 'use' or 'try...finally...', even without resorting to Camlp4 -- I leave that as an exercise to the reader or to the time when we decide to start an OSR thread on that issue * in any case, there's no need to change OCaml itself to do any of these, or even to add a IDisposable interface and an object-oriented hierarchy, only the distribution. Let me remind you that the initial topic of the thread was to agree upon a discussion process, not to debate on a specific issue. So do we agree on the OSR process as I've described it or does anyone believe we should first change it ? Cheers, David On Mon, 2008-01-28 at 11:37 -0500, Brian Hurt wrote: > Monads strike me as being a better way to do this, but again, we're talking about deep changes to Ocaml. The alternative- wait until the object is garbage collected, depends upon the form of the garbage collector. -- David Teller Security of Distributed Systems http://www.univ-orleans.fr/lifo/Members/David.Teller Angry researcher: French Universities need reforms, but the LRU act brings liquidations.