On 0821, William Lovas wrote:
[...]
> There's no need for everything to be an object, and i don't really see
> what that would buy you in the long run, since O'Caml doesn't have any
> "top" or "top-like" type, like Java's Object.  Why do you want the standard
> library's functionality replicated in object form?
> 
> William

Hashtbl.add h "foo" "bar" <--> h#add "foo" "bar"

Because it is shorter to type -> less errors, quicker programming
OO can be cool. (see ruby)
I'm not OO fan, but lazy :)

Gergo
-- 
+-[ Kontra, Gergely<kgergely@mcl.hu> PhD student Room IB113 ]---------+
| http://www.mcl.hu/~kgergely            "Olyan langesz vagyok, hogy  |
| Mobil:(+36 20) 356 9656 ICQ: 175564914   poroltoval kellene jarnom" |
+-- Magyar php mirror es magyar php dokumentacio: http://hu.php.net --+

----- End forwarded message -----

-- 
+-[ Kontra, Gergely<kgergely@mcl.hu> PhD student Room IB113 ]---------+
| http://www.mcl.hu/~kgergely            "Olyan langesz vagyok, hogy  |
| Mobil:(+36 20) 356 9656 ICQ: 175564914   poroltoval kellene jarnom" |
+-- Magyar php mirror es magyar php dokumentacio: http://hu.php.net --+

-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners