On Wed, 11 Apr 2001, Jacques Garrigue wrote:

> The situation seems to have calmed down a bit. Or is it just that
> there is another more active thread?
> 
> Anyway, I think that the conclusion is not very far. At least, we have
> collected all known problems about labels, and tried to answer them.
> 
> Here is a summary of the plan I tried to draw from many people's
> contributions (and my own experience and convictions :-)):
> 
> * remove labels from standard libraries
> * make label mode the default (and practically unique) mode;
>   this preserves compatibility with ocaml 2.x
> * slightly extend it to allow non-labelled complete applications of
>   functions: this is non-ambiguous, but keep a warning for purists,
>   and also because of the slight mismatch between program text and
>   untyped semantics
> * put some labels in alternative versions of a few libraries
>   (List, Array, Unix). Access to these libraries would use already
>   existing ways: "open Stdlabels", "module Unix = Lunix"

If you are going to make new versions of the standard libraries, it's a
good moment for doing some unifications of these libraries:

for example will be good if all "collection" modules (List,Array,
String, Map, Set, Hashtbl) will have similar sets of functions:

for examples - fold's, map's, etc in String,
iteri, mapi, foldi in String, Array, Map, Set etc.

or, for example, types 'a List.t, 'a Array.t for simplifing of usage
Array and List as parameters for functors. etc.


or include functions print:
String.print 
Char.print 
...

instead of print_string etc.

String.compare: string -> string -> int
Char.compare: char -> char -> int
etc.

And many others changes of the same kind.

Regards,
Anton
-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr.  Archives: http://caml.inria.fr