Browse thread
[OSR] OCaml Standard Recommandation Process
[
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: | David Teller <David.Teller@u...> |
| Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] [OSR] OCaml Standard Recommandation Process |
A few things here: * we can provide two libraries, one with monads and one without, and let users choose whichever they use * it's quite easy to build a generic resource-disposal facility on par with 'use' or 'try...finally...', even without resorting to Camlp4 -- I leave that as an exercise to the reader or to the time when we decide to start an OSR thread on that issue * in any case, there's no need to change OCaml itself to do any of these, or even to add a IDisposable interface and an object-oriented hierarchy, only the distribution. Let me remind you that the initial topic of the thread was to agree upon a discussion process, not to debate on a specific issue. So do we agree on the OSR process as I've described it or does anyone believe we should first change it ? Cheers, David On Mon, 2008-01-28 at 11:37 -0500, Brian Hurt wrote: > Monads strike me as being a better way to do this, but again, we're talking about deep changes to Ocaml. The alternative- wait until the object is garbage collected, depends upon the form of the garbage collector. -- David Teller Security of Distributed Systems http://www.univ-orleans.fr/lifo/Members/David.Teller Angry researcher: French Universities need reforms, but the LRU act brings liquidations.