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] Five Questions about Objects
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: 2002-07-14 (09:39)
From: Jacques Garrigue <garrigue@k...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Five Questions about Objects
From: Alain Frisch <>
> On Sun, 14 Jul 2002, YAMAGATA yoriyuki wrote:
> > However, I wonder why a class is necessary in the first place.  I'm
> > not familiar with the theory of OOP, but I feel like direct creation
> > of objects is possible in functional languages.
> It is already possible in OCaml, thanks to local modules:
> "object ... end"
> ===>
> let module M = struct class o = object ... end end in new M.o
> It would be straightforward to define a Camlp4 syntax extension for this.

This only works if your object has a monomorphic type.

The real point is that if object definitions were really first class
in the language, they would not be restricted by these strange
variable binding conditions: type inference would be enough.
Since there is no theoretical problem here, it may well be a useful

  Jacques Garrigue
To unsubscribe, mail Archives:
Bug reports: FAQ:
Beginner's list: