Browse thread
Wanted: your feedback on the hierarchy of OCaml Batteries Included
[
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] Wanted: your feedback on the hierarchy of OCaml Batteries Included |
Ok, that's an interesting point. Now, we just need to all agree on one standard :) On Tue, 2008-11-18 at 12:28 +0000, Benedikt Grundmann wrote: > > Do you see any better way of managing the complexity of all this? > Yes don't introduce it at all, make a decision to use or not use labels > and stick with it. Similarly make a decision to use or not use exceptions > as the "default", suffix / rename alternative functions as appropriate > (consistently). Consistency is a big win. Not only as it speeds you up > when you read/modify other people's code it also reduces the amount > of decisions you have to do when writing new code. > > http://ocaml.janestreet.com/?q=node/28 > > Cheers, > > Bene > -- 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.