English version
Accueil     À propos     Téléchargement     Ressources     Contactez-nous    

Ce site est rarement mis à jour. Pour les informations les plus récentes, rendez-vous sur le nouveau site OCaml à l'adresse ocaml.org.

Browse thread
RE: [Caml-list] Some Clarifications
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: 2005-07-28 (00:29)
From: Robert Roessler <roessler@r...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Some Clarifications
Richard Jones wrote:

> On Wed, Jul 27, 2005 at 04:55:32AM -0700, Robert Roessler wrote:
>>An object certainly seems a natural and concise way to represent a 
>>"state-holder-with-structured-access" - and I have done just that in a 
>>small OCaml project... but that could be the Smalltalk and C++ in my 
>>background talking. :)
> Modules actually work better for this.

In a non-trolling and non-flaming way (of course), I would be 
interested in examples illustrating your assertion - simple or 
complex, real or synthetic - I am usually ready to learn. :)

Robert Roessler