From: Brian Rogoff <bpr@best.com>
To: Miles Egan <miles@caddr.com>
Cc: caml-list@inria.fr
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] a reckless proposal
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 08:47:51 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0107260841331.21480-100000@shell5.ba.best.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20010726082735.A65526@caddr.com>
On Thu, 26 Jul 2001, Miles Egan wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 25, 2001 at 08:15:49AM -0700, Brian Rogoff wrote:
> > It also seems that you'd like to eliminate these false friends (good phrase,
> > especially for a bilingual French-English mailing list!) by subsuming them
> > into features that mainstream programmers know well. That would be a
> > mistake, since you'd end up with a mainstream language.
>
> I certainly wouldn't generally characterize my intentions that way. I'm more
> interested in re-evaluating gratuitous differences. At any rate, I agree that
> the loss of pattern-matching more than outweighs the benefits in this case.
> Ocaml is stylistically quite comfortably out of the mainstream in many ways and
> I'm sure it will remain so.
I think pattern matching is a compelling feature. I'd like to see
extensions to OCaml's pattern matching, like the SMLish ability to to
distinguish a partial and full record match (yeah I know backwards
compatibility may be an issue). And views, and...
>
> > 90s). Ada packages correspond very closely to ML modules, and there are
> > even crude approximations to functors and signatures in Ada 95 (generic
> > formal package parameters in Ada parlance).
>
> It's not the combination of packaging and polymorphism in Ocaml that I think is
> confusing. In fact, I think it's one of it's most compelling features. It's
> the fact that compilation units are implicit top-level modules with special
> properties. A few paragraphs in the documentation explaining top-level modules
> and the relationship between source files and implicit top-level modules might
> clarify this a bit better for new users.
http://caml.inria.fr/ocaml/htmlman/manual005.html section 4.5 explains it.
Maybe a few more paragraphs showing how to use module types, functors, and
top level modules in a smallish compiled program would help?
> Perhaps some kind of "Ocaml for Java Programmers" FAQ might be useful?
I don't use Java enough that it's the source of false friends. Are you
volunteering?
-- Brian
-------------------
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-07-26 15:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-07-24 18:08 Miles Egan
2001-07-24 19:44 ` Brian Rogoff
2001-07-24 21:02 ` Miles Egan
2001-07-25 15:15 ` Brian Rogoff
2001-07-26 15:27 ` Miles Egan
2001-07-26 15:47 ` Brian Rogoff [this message]
2001-07-26 16:01 ` Miles Egan
2001-07-26 21:19 ` John Max Skaller
2001-07-24 20:26 ` Sven
2001-07-24 20:51 ` Miles Egan
2001-07-25 8:30 ` FabienFleutot
2001-07-25 9:30 Dave Berry
2001-07-26 15:35 ` Miles Egan
2001-07-30 12:21 ` Bruce Hoult
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=Pine.BSF.4.21.0107260841331.21480-100000@shell5.ba.best.com \
--to=bpr@best.com \
--cc=caml-list@inria.fr \
--cc=miles@caddr.com \
/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