Re: [Caml-list] The Implicit Accumulator: a design pattern using optional arguments

[Jon Harrop <jon@ffconsultancy.com>]

On Thursday 28 June 2007 23:12:34 Thomas Fischbacher wrote:
> Dirk Thierbach wrote:
> >>>Pass the stack as an argument to those functions that need it.
> >>
> >>Precisely this is how you would have to do this with ML. But then, if
> >>you do not just deal with one stack, but have more complicated context,
> >>OR if you have to start thinking about threading the stack through
> >>functions that do not use it, but use other functions which use it,
> >>things easily get quite awkward.
> >
> > So could one "hide the plumbing" in a monad?
>
> Hmmm. In principle, yes. I think that should be possible here.
> (Done this for a related problem where contextual typesetting
> information is passed around.)

Is this the kind of thing you're after:

  http://okmij.org/ftp/ML/#dynvar

I must confess, I don't see the lure when you have currying...

-- 
Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
The OCaml Journal
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/ocaml_journal/?e