From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2947EBB81 for ; Sun, 12 Dec 2004 04:07:40 +0100 (CET) Received: from herd.plethora.net (herd.plethora.net [205.166.146.1]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id iBC37cLB025375 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for ; Sun, 12 Dec 2004 04:07:39 +0100 Received: from bhurt.plethora.net (bhurt.plethora.net [205.166.146.49]) by herd.plethora.net (8.13.1/8.12.11) with ESMTP id iBC37Gps012363 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sat, 11 Dec 2004 21:07:19 -0600 (CST) Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 21:09:53 -0600 (CST) From: Brian Hurt X-X-Sender: bhurt@localhost.localdomain To: skaller Cc: Micha , Subject: Re: [Caml-list] How to use Set Datatype In-Reply-To: <1102809942.2611.647.camel@pelican.wigram> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Miltered: at nez-perce with ID 41BBB5FA.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 datatype:01 wrote:01 wrote:01 ocaml:01 implicitly:01 functor:01 syntax:01 inlining:01 inline:01 tend:02 newbie:02 binding:02 brian:03 brian:03 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.0 (2004-09-13) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled version=3.0.0 X-Spam-Level: On 12 Dec 2004, skaller wrote: > On Sun, 2004-12-12 at 08:12, Brian Hurt wrote: > > On Fri, 10 Dec 2004, Micha wrote: > > > Another thing- longtime Ocaml programmers tend to inline their structure > > definitions. > > Why? Because binding implicitly by name is basically bogus? Yes. But it makes the functor application look complicated and clunky to a newbie, when it really isn't. Once you're familiar with the syntax, inlining becomes a better option. Brian