From: kahl@heraklit.informatik.unibw-muenchen.de
To: caml-list@inria.fr
Cc: garrigue@kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Future of labels
Date: 30 Mar 2001 09:45:23 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20010330094523.6283.qmail@dionysos.informatik.unibw-muenchen.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20010330120112L.garrigue@kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp> (message from Jacques Garrigue on Fri, 30 Mar 2001 12:01:12 +0900)
Jacques Garrigue <garrigue@kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp> replied to
"Manuel Fahndrich" <maf@microsoft.com>:
> > 1) The standard library requires ~f: labels on many function arguments.
> > That seems silly. I basically had to add ~f: to many places where it did
> > not add disambiguation (f is not a very explicit name). I can see that
> > for partial applications that might be useful, but still I found this a
> > bit annoying.
>
> Not really for partial application (you rarely want to apply to a list
> before the function), but rather for layout. Mostly a question of
> taste, but if you like it really changes the way you use functionals.
>
> Anyway, if we remove labels from the standard library, this would
> solve the problem.
I am a long-time label user (having started when OCaml still was
Caml Special Light) and I have therefore gone through quite a few
relabellings of the standard library.
They never really hurt me (with a 50 module 30000 line project) ---
only when labels went away, it meant trouble.
(To make it clear: I ONLY use label mode and do not intend to switch.)
Jacques' words seem to indicate that there seems to be a
complete unlabelling of the standard library in the works ---
I must confess that I do not like that at all.
(Is my interpretation right? I got the impression that
this was the only change intended for label mode.)
Especially for the ``f'' label!
(This was ``fun'' before the OCaml/OLabl merger
and had to be changed to accommodate the new rule that
keywords were not allowed as labels anymore ---
I'd rather have the keyword ``fun'' replaced by Haskell's ``\'',
or by a real lambda in a suitable character set!)
My point with the ``f'' label is that I need it almost always:
For List.map, List.fold_right and friends I usually have
only simple list arguments, but complex functions,
and do not see the point why I should
let-define that function beforehand.
So I think it is most readable to write the following:
let list3 = List.map list2
~f:(fun x -> .....
... x ...
..........) in
....
If the ``f'' label goes away,
then I need a labelled wrapper around the standard library.
If none is provided, I have to write it myself,
but I would much prefer to have a standard labelling of the standard library,
since this also provides the label-using community with useful conventions and
guidelines.
And I do find the labels in the standard library useful with OCamlBrowser --
I use that much more than my copy of the html-version of the OCaml manual!
Cheers,
Wolfram Kahl
And if the ``f'' label was to go away
-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr. Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-04-01 20:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-03-29 19:56 Manuel Fahndrich
2001-03-30 3:01 ` Jacques Garrigue
2001-03-30 8:23 ` Markus Mottl
2001-03-30 9:45 ` kahl [this message]
2001-03-30 10:43 ` Jacques Garrigue
2001-03-30 12:32 ` Benjamin C. Pierce
2001-03-31 21:52 ` [Caml-list] ocamlbrowser [was labels] Brock
[not found] ` <27280.986075478@saul.cis.upenn.edu>
2001-04-01 9:28 ` [Caml-list] " Jacques Garrigue
2001-04-01 21:16 ` Benjamin C. Pierce
2001-04-03 17:43 ` Francisco Valverde Albacete
2001-04-04 7:56 ` Michael Hicks
2001-04-09 4:43 ` John Max Skaller
2001-03-30 10:39 ` [Caml-list] Future of labels Judicael Courant
2001-03-30 10:54 ` Jacques Garrigue
2001-03-30 11:22 ` Francois Pottier
2001-03-30 12:41 ` Benjamin C. Pierce
2001-03-30 14:16 ` Jean-Marc Alliot
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2001-04-11 3:35 G Michael Sawka
2001-03-31 3:40 Yaron M. Minsky
[not found] <200103300810.AAA05312@mrs.mrs.med.ge.com>
2001-03-30 10:31 ` Jacques Garrigue
2001-03-29 23:47 Arturo Borquez
2001-03-29 0:44 Jacques Garrigue
[not found] ` <AAEBJHFJOIPMMIILCEPBEEFHCHAA.mattias.waldau@abc.se>
2001-03-29 6:43 ` Jacques Garrigue
2001-03-29 11:44 ` Mattias Waldau
2001-03-29 17:52 ` Mattias Waldau
2001-03-29 8:22 ` Chris Hecker
2001-03-29 9:46 ` Markus Mottl
2001-04-09 1:28 ` John Max Skaller
2001-04-09 8:45 ` Markus Mottl
2001-04-10 18:42 ` John Max Skaller
2001-04-10 22:01 ` Markus Mottl
2001-03-29 12:53 ` Judicael Courant
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=20010330094523.6283.qmail@dionysos.informatik.unibw-muenchen.de \
--to=kahl@heraklit.informatik.unibw-muenchen.de \
--cc=caml-list@inria.fr \
--cc=garrigue@kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp \
/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