Browse thread
Re: [Caml-list] Future of labels
-
Yaron M. Minsky
-
Jacques Garrigue
-
Judicael Courant
- Markus Mottl
- kahl@h...
- Chris Hecker
-
Judicael Courant
-
Jacques Garrigue
[
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: | Ohad Rodeh <orodeh@c...> |
| Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] Future of labels, and ideas for library labelling |
List,
I've been using OCaml for several years now, taught
with it, and helped build and maintain a very large (80KLOC) line
serious application with it. I think it is a truly
great language.
My opinion with regards to Labels is that they are a fine
extension of the language, allowing better documentation and
type checking. However, using compulsory label-mode would require me
to change all my calls to Higher-Order functions in the standard
library (e.g. List.{map,for_all,exists,for_all2,exists2,...}).
I also use the Unix module regularly, and I wouldn't like the added
verbosity of labels.
So, while labels are a find addition, they should stay out of the way
of ordinary usage, so they are in fact optional much like
objects, polymorphic variants, and functors.
All the best,
Ohad.
----------------------------------------------------------
orodeh@cs.huji.ac.il
www.cs.huji.ac.il/~orodeh
-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr. Archives: http://caml.inria.fr