From: brogoff <brogoff@speakeasy.net>
To: Caml List <caml-list@inria.fr>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] About Obj (was Recursive lists)
Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 10:02:44 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0410150933000.20927@shell2.speakeasy.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <416F88D6.8090601@baretta.com>
On Fri, 15 Oct 2004, Alex Baretta wrote:
> > On Wed, 13 Oct 2004, Alex Baretta wrote:
>
> >>You might have noticed that Caml breeders use Obj fairly liberally when
> >>it is needed to achieve a higher of abstraction which cannot be modeled
> >>in the core language.
> >
> >
> brogoff wrote:
> > Good point, but I hope every Caml fan accepts these uses as being neccesary
> > compromises of the moment that can one day be eliminated by a stronger core
> > language.
> >
> > -- Brian
>
> Not necessarily. You certainly don't mean to say that the C FFI is a
> necessary compromise to be removed one day?
No. It's clear that when you're interfacing to C or any unsafe language that
you have to tolerate, well, unsafe features.
I am saying that there are places where the core language doesn't allow you to
express something which you'd like to express conveniently or at all.
A type system example is polymorphic recursion. Of course, you can handle it
easier since we got polymorphic methods and recursive mdules and all that, but
it is IMO just one of those things you want to be able to do easily. Using Obj
for this is repugnant, or at least, aesthetically deficient.
A non type system example might be laziness. "lazy" features are added to core
ML to make some kinds of programming more convenient. `
> We already have a very strong core language, which is fully type safe.
So, the core language should be frozen in its current state?
Is marshalling part of the core language? If so, then the core is not fully
type safe.
I like the fact that the language is undergoing a fairly slow (well, lightning
fast by SML standards!) evolution.
-- Brian
PS: "core" is overloaded in the ML world. I think when a lot of MLers talk about
the "core ML" they don't include the module system. When I speak of core Caml,
I mean something like Caml Special Light. ML means Modular Language in my
lexicon :-)
-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-10-15 17:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 45+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-10-08 13:20 [Caml-list] Recursive lists Luca Pascali
2004-10-08 13:31 ` Keith Wansbrough
2004-10-08 14:32 ` skaller
2004-10-08 14:42 ` Alex Baretta
2004-10-08 15:43 ` David Brown
2004-10-08 17:19 ` Alex Baretta
2004-10-08 23:29 ` skaller
2004-10-09 8:35 ` Keith Wansbrough
2004-10-09 9:07 ` skaller
2004-10-09 8:32 ` Keith Wansbrough
2004-10-08 17:18 ` Wolfgang Lux
2004-10-11 0:44 ` Brian Hurt
2004-10-11 6:32 ` William Lovas
2004-10-11 6:52 ` Ville-Pertti Keinonen
2004-10-13 11:29 ` Alex Baretta
2004-10-13 11:22 ` Alex Baretta
2004-10-11 9:04 ` Keith Wansbrough
2004-10-08 14:05 ` Sébastien Furic
2004-10-08 14:44 ` Alex Baretta
2004-10-08 15:09 ` Jon Harrop
2004-10-08 15:13 ` james woodyatt
2004-10-08 14:26 ` sejourne_kevin
2004-10-08 18:28 ` Alex Baretta
2004-10-11 8:01 ` Jean-Christophe Filliatre
2004-10-11 9:20 ` Diego Olivier Fernandez Pons
2004-10-11 13:38 ` [Caml-list] About Obj (was Recursive lists) Christophe Raffalli
2004-10-11 13:49 ` [Caml-list] " Christophe Raffalli
2004-10-11 15:33 ` [Caml-list] " Jon Harrop
2004-10-11 16:09 ` Richard Jones
2004-10-11 16:40 ` [Caml-list] About Obj Yamagata Yoriyuki
2004-10-13 11:59 ` Alex Baretta
2004-10-11 16:24 ` [Caml-list] About Obj (was Recursive lists) james woodyatt
2004-10-11 16:46 ` brogoff
2004-10-11 17:24 ` james woodyatt
2004-10-12 0:19 ` skaller
2004-10-20 22:10 ` Greg K
2004-10-12 15:19 ` Christophe Raffalli
2004-10-13 11:42 ` Alex Baretta
2004-10-13 21:19 ` brogoff
2004-10-14 9:52 ` Andreas Rossberg
2004-10-14 17:38 ` brogoff
2004-10-15 8:22 ` Alex Baretta
2004-10-15 17:02 ` brogoff [this message]
2004-10-17 13:42 ` Alex Baretta
2004-10-12 6:17 ` [Caml-list] Recursive lists sejourne_kevin
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.LNX.4.58.0410150933000.20927@shell2.speakeasy.net \
--to=brogoff@speakeasy.net \
--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