Browse thread
[Caml-list] infix functions
-
Jonathan Roewen
- Richard Jones
- Jean-Christophe Filliatre
- Vincenzo Ciancia
[
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: | 2005-05-27 (11:12) |
From: | Jean-Christophe Filliatre <Jean-Christophe.Filliatre@l...> |
Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] infix functions |
Jonathan Roewen writes: > > For instance, the Int32 (etc) modules are horrible to use cause of the > prefix functions. These are perfect candidates for being infix. And > being an OS project, there are a lot of instances where we need the > extra precision, and having to do things like add some_int32 > another_int32 complex. Especially when you have to throw in > bitshifting, AND and OR, and other magic. In some simple cases, it can help to insert let (+) = Int32.add let (-) = Int32.sub ... at the beginning of your files (or better to put these declarations within a small module that you open only when you need the infix notation). You can even adopt other notations, such as +!, -!, etc. Only the first character is used to determine the operator precedence. Beware of the lexical issue with multiplication :-) Hope this helps, -- Jean-Christophe