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 AAA21568 for caml-red; Mon, 17 Jul 2000 00:07:04 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id SAA26320 for ; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 18:14:00 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from web5101.mail.yahoo.com (web5101.mail.yahoo.com [216.115.106.71]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.10.0/8.10.0) with SMTP id e6BGDxT28072 for ; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 18:13:59 +0200 (MET DST) Message-ID: <20000711161355.26204.qmail@web5101.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [134.10.2.10] by web5101.mail.yahoo.com; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 09:13:55 PDT Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 09:13:55 -0700 (PDT) From: x y Subject: query: experience with object system To: caml-list@inria.fr MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: weis@pauillac.inria.fr Like, I suspect, many ocaml users, I've read the documentation for the object system, thought that it looked neat, but not really used it too much. Well, what do people think? I'm particularly interested in what people who have worked with other object-oriented languages have to say. Does ocaml have any great advantages over C++, smalltalk or CLOS? Are there features in those languages that you miss in ocaml? The other question I have is whether you find it hard to integrate object-oriented programming with a traditional ML style. Modules, higher-order polymorphic functions, variants and records, objects, and now polymorphic variants seem to provide a lot of overlapping functionality. Does this make it hard to rationally design systems or reuse code? __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get Yahoo! Mail – Free email you can access from anywhere! http://mail.yahoo.com/