Version française
Home     About     Download     Resources     Contact us    

This site is updated infrequently. For up-to-date information, please visit the new OCaml website at

Browse thread
[Caml-list] Evaluation Order
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: -- (:)
From: John Max Skaller <skaller@o...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Evaluation Order
David McClain wrote:
[order of evaluation problem]

> Any thoughts? (other than that I was boneheaded here!)

	Actually, I think that the problem is that the
Ocaml syntax is basically designed for a referentially
transparent functional programming language, which
Ocaml is not. 

	If you have a function with side-effects,
return 'unit'. At worst:

	f ( g () ) 

which is equivalent to

	g(); f()

[Ugh: Felix has a type 'void' to prevent this]

John (Max) Skaller,
10/1 Toxteth Rd Glebe NSW 2037 Australia voice: 61-2-9660-0850
checkout Vyper
download Interscript
Bug reports:  FAQ:
To unsubscribe, mail  Archives: