Browse thread
Smells like duck-typing
[
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: | Dario Teixeira <darioteixeira@y...> |
| Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] Smells like duck-typing |
Hi,
And a big thanks to everyone -- you've really given me a lot of interesting
ideas. For the time being, I am going for the no-inheritance object solution:
it avoids the option type mess, provides a clean interface to users of the
module, and allows code reuse thanks to OCaml's structural subtyping feature
(the "duck" in this thread's title). Moreover, while obviously not as concise
as a record, the declaration of each story variant is still quite economical:
class full (id, title, intro, body) =
object
method id: int = id
method title: string = title
method intro: string = intro
method body: string = body
end
class blurb (id, title, intro) =
object
method id: int = id
method title: string = title
method intro: string = intro
end
Etc, etc. I can live with this.
Cheers,
Dario
___________________________________________________________
Want ideas for reducing your carbon footprint? Visit Yahoo! For Good http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/forgood/environment.html