Mailing list for all users of the OCaml language and system.
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Vincent Aravantinos <vincent.aravantinos@gmail.com>
To: caml-list@inria.fr
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Include question
Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2011 10:41:15 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4EBA9F1B.3060801@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1320823798.6647.2.camel@Nokia-N900>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1912 bytes --]



On 11/09/2011 02:29 AM, Cedric Cellier wrote:
> For some reasons though, despite functors being one of the greatest 
> strength of the language, we do seam shy to use, recommand or brag 
> about them. I wonder if this is due to the lack of proper documentation ?
I don't think there is a lack of proper documentation: it is introduced 
right away in the "tutorial" part of the Ocaml manual (Part I), it is 
described in the language description (Part II) and there are a couple 
of examples in the std lib (Part IV). What do you think it lacks to be 
properly documented (at least w.r.t other features of Ocaml)?

I actually wonder if they just *look* too complicated? Maybe because 
they are verbose?
Each time you define a functor you also have to give the signature of 
its argument, which, compared to a simple "include" can look overkilling.
Concretely:

module A = struct
   ...
end

module B = struct
   include A
   ...
end

VS

module A = struct
   ...
end

module type B_INPUT = sig
   ... (can be big)
end

module Make_B (X:B_INPUT) = struct
   ...
end

For one module that's fine, but when you start having lots of modules 
and intricate interactions between them, that can start to be a pain in 
the ass.
In addition, this include->functor switch happens quite often when you 
have sources that were not written in the first place with functors in 
mind, so this is not an uncommon situation.

I think personally that this verbosity is actually a good thing because 
it forces to give some documentation which is particularly needed when 
many modules are interacting.
But then this documentation argument is a bit contradictory with what we 
sell to beginners when they learn Ocaml: "Ocaml is great because it has 
type inference, this removes verbosity!"...

-- 
Vincent Aravantinos
Postdoctoral Fellow, Concordia University, Hardware Verification Group
http://users.encs.concordia.ca/~vincent


[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3371 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2011-11-09 15:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-11-08 15:03 Hans Ole Rafaelsen
2011-11-08 15:10 ` Gabriel Scherer
2011-11-08 15:45   ` Hans Ole Rafaelsen
2011-11-08 15:50     ` Thomas Gazagnaire
2011-11-08 15:49   ` Alexandre Pilkiewicz
2011-11-09  7:29     ` Cedric Cellier
2011-11-09 15:41       ` Vincent Aravantinos [this message]
2011-11-09 15:50         ` Vincent Aravantinos
2011-11-09 16:29           ` rossberg
2011-11-09 17:08             ` Vincent Aravantinos
2011-11-09 23:36             ` Jacques Garrigue
2011-11-10 12:08               ` rossberg

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=4EBA9F1B.3060801@gmail.com \
    --to=vincent.aravantinos@gmail.com \
    --cc=caml-list@inria.fr \
    /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