Browse thread
[Caml-list] C++ STL and template features compared with OCaml parametric polymorphism and OO features
[
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: | 2004-09-27 (13:32) |
From: | Radu Grigore <radugrigore@g...> |
Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] C++ STL and template features compared with OCaml parametric polymorphism and OO features |
On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 14:11:30 +0100, Jon Harrop <jon@jdh30.plus.com> wrote: > > For the writter of the function there is a big difference, especially > > if it has to write the specialized versions. > > The equivalent to the writer of fold is the writer of an iterator. You have to > write specialized versions for each type of iterator just as you would have > to write your own fold. That's why I said iterators are another level of abstraction. The difference is that after you write the iterators code for a new sequence-like data structure all the "generic" functions, not only fold but also map and others, will automagically work on them. The simplest form of an "iterator" is implementing a "next" function for all sequences (although in this situation it is more of an "enumeration"). regards, radu ------------------- 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