Version française
Home     About     Download     Resources     Contact us    
Browse thread
Wanted: your feedback on the hierarchy of OCaml Batteries Included
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: -- (:)
From: David Teller <David.Teller@u...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Wanted: your feedback on the hierarchy of OCaml Batteries Included
On Tue, 2008-11-18 at 05:31 -0800, Dario Teixeira wrote:
> Paraphrasing Einstein, I think the hierarchy should be as flat
> as possible, but no flatter.  For example, I see no reason to
> materialise in the hierarchy the separation between persistent
> and mutable data structures.  The should be a documentation
> issue.  However, and as you noted, there are cases where some
> hierarchisation may remove namespace clutter and allow for
> better code reuse.

Duly noted. As you may see on our candidate replacement hierarchy, we
intend to merge Data.Persistent and Data.Mutable into Data.Containers.

Whether we flatten further remains open to debate.

Thanks,
 David

-- 
David Teller-Rajchenbach
 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.