Re: [Caml-list] mutually dependent modules

[Michal Moskal <malekith@pld-linux.org>]

On Tue, Feb 18, 2003 at 09:18:49PM -0800, Issac Trotts wrote:
> I've seen both, but I now avoid the "let _ = " expression because if you 
> leave it
> out then ocamlc gives a warning when you don't supply all the arguments 
> to a
> function.  The warning is good to have.

let () = f a b c in
let () = g c in
let () = a := b in
...

but after writing lots of imperative code (using camlgl), I found
regular:

f a b c;
g c;
a := b;
...

clearer.

All you need is to remember priority of ';' WRT if-then, match and so
on.

-- 
: Michal Moskal ::::: malekith/at/pld-linux.org :  GCS {C,UL}++++$ a? !tv
: PLD Linux ::::::: Wroclaw University, CS Dept :  {E-,w}-- {b++,e}>+++ h

-------------------
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