Re: [Caml-list] writing some code using a function for which only the signature is known

[oliver <oliver@first.in-berlin.de>]

On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 08:12:26AM +0200, dmitry grebeniuk wrote:
> Hello.
> 
> (sorry for dupe, I've sent first message privately, not in mailing
> list; and I've fixed some code here.)
> 
> > If I am writing some code, and I don't want to dive
> > into implementing some sub function I will need but don't
> > have yet, what is the standard way to do this in ocaml?
> 
>  I don't know any standart way, but I'm using "raise Exit"
> for this purpose.
> 
>  Or you can use exception that carry function's name,
> like this:
> 
> exception Not_implemented of string
> let notimpl funcname = raise (Not_implemented funcname)
> let myfunc _myparam1 _myparam2 = notimpl "myfunc"
[...]

Ah, now I understand what the problem of the OP was.

Why do you use the step with a seperated function that raises the exception?
For convenience only?

In the case of non implemented functions I would prefer to see the
raisement of an exception in the code, and not covering it with
a wrapper function.

[...]
>  Notice the first underscores in arguments' names: they
> are here to suppress warnings about unused bindings
> (really, these bindings are unused in this function).
[...]

Beginning underlines do suppress warning messages?


Ciao,
   Oliver