Browse thread
[Caml-list] non-exported functions
[
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: | Richard Jones <rich@a...> |
| Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] non-exported functions |
On Thu, Oct 30, 2003 at 05:25:47AM +1100, skaller wrote: > Aw, its kind of annoying. Two or three extra keywords might > fix 95% of cases: > > let private x = ... > > Just don't put x in the interface > > type abstract x = .. > > put x in the interface as > > type x This is a good idea (although in practice writing .mli files isn't too much of a bind for me). Still, every little bit helps. For classes I've started ALWAYS doing .mli files because that way you can control private/protected/public methods very accurately. See the other thread on this issue. Rich. -- Richard Jones. http://www.annexia.org/ http://freshmeat.net/users/rwmj Merjis Ltd. http://www.merjis.com/ - all your business data are belong to you. 'There is a joke about American engineers and French engineers. The American team brings a prototype to the French team. The French team's response is: "Well, it works fine in practice; but how will it hold up in theory?"' ------------------- 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