Re: [Caml-list] Proposal: extend try to handle success

[Markus Mottl <markus.mottl@gmail.com>]

Btw., I also agree with the postscript on the symmetric extension to
"match".  I think it would improve code clarity if developers could
use "try" to indicate that they expect an exception as a means of
control flow, whereas "exception"-branches in "match" clauses would be
more suitable for truly exceptional (as in "error") conditions.

On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 2:18 PM, Markus Mottl <markus.mottl@gmail.com> wrote:
> Nice!  I've always hated the "option"-workaround required to maintain
> tail-recursion with exception handlers.  The required syntax change
> seems quite benign, too, and the feature might improve performance a
> bit, assuming the code generator has a special case for it rather than
> internally rewriting the code to use the "option"-workaround.  Doesn't
> sound difficult to do either.
>
> Regards,
> Markus
>
> On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 12:00 PM, Jeremy Yallop <yallop@gmail.com> wrote:
>> The recent thread about the representation of options highlighted a
>> shortcoming in the "try" construct: there isn't a convenient way to
>> express code that should run when the body of the "try" doesn't raise
>> an exception.
>>
>> I'd like to propose extending OCaml with a design once suggested by
>> Christophe Raffalli which elegantly handles this case.  The details,
>> along with an implementation that you can try out, are in the
>> following blog post:
>>
>>     http://ocamllabs.github.io/compiler-hacking/2014/02/04/handler-case.html
>>
>> Feedback welcome!
>>
>> Jeremy
>>
>> --
>> Caml-list mailing list.  Subscription management and archives:
>> https://sympa.inria.fr/sympa/arc/caml-list
>> Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners
>> Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs
>
>
>
> --
> Markus Mottl        http://www.ocaml.info        markus.mottl@gmail.com



-- 
Markus Mottl        http://www.ocaml.info        markus.mottl@gmail.com