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: | 2008-11-18 (09:56) |
From: | David Teller <David.Teller@u...> |
Subject: | Wanted: your feedback on the hierarchy of OCaml Batteries Included |
Dear list, As you know, we've been working for several months of OCaml Batteries Included. Early in the development, it appeared to us that, with the large number of modules involved, we would need a hierarchy of modules. For instance, for the moment, we have a module [System] containing among other submodules [IO] (definition of i/o operations), [File] (definition of operations on files), [Sys] (the usual OCaml [Sys] module, soon to be expanded), etc. Therefore, before one may open and manipulate files, one has to do open System.IO;; open System.File;; or, with the syntax extension we developed to alleviate this, open System, IO, File The syntax extension does a few other things which we're not going to detail here -- for one thing, it allows local opening of modules. Now, we've decided that our current hierarchy is perhaps somewhat clumsy and that it may benefit from some reworking. Before we proceed, we'd like some feedback from the community. For this purpose, I have posted a tree of the current hierarchy on my blog [1]. The documentation is available online, as usual [2] Thank you for your feedback, For the Batteries Pack, David [1] http://dutherenverseauborddelatable.wordpress.com/2008/11/18/batteries-hierarchy/ [2] http://batteries.forge.ocamlcore.org/doc.preview/batteries-alpha2/doc/batteries/html/api/index.html -- 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.