Browse thread
are initial values in class fields mandatory ? (ocaml)
-
fbesnard
-
Donald Syme
- Xavier Leroy
- Francois Pessaux
-
Donald Syme
[
Home
]
[ Index:
by date
|
by threads
]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
| Date: | -- (:) |
| From: | Xavier Leroy <Xavier.Leroy@i...> |
| Subject: | Re: per-line comments |
> > - there is no 'per line' comment (like Ada's "--" or C++'s "//" ) ? > I too think this is a must. It may not quite accord with the personal > tastes of the CaML implementors, Caml's comment syntax is more a question of historical tradition than personal tastes. After all, the comment syntax is perhaps the only bit of syntax that hasn't changed between LCF ML, Caml, and Standard ML... > but many good programmers use this > extensively in their in-line documentation. I don't quite get the point about in-line documentation. I write perfectly fine on-line documentation between (* and *). Why would it be any better with // or -- ? > I figure they should be > able to transfer their "existing practice" when they make the switch to > CaML, just to make the switch as painless as possible. Depends from which background you come. E.g. for a well-trained C programmer, delimited comments make more sense. At any rate, the main problem with per-line comments (as with most syntax extension) is that they need a reserved symbol. Both // and -- are valid OCaml infix identifiers; // is even used in the Num standard library module. - Xavier Leroy