English version
Accueil     À propos     Téléchargement     Ressources     Contactez-nous    

Ce site est rarement mis à jour. Pour les informations les plus récentes, rendez-vous sur le nouveau site OCaml à l'adresse ocaml.org.

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: 2008-11-18 (10:29)
From: Erkki Seppala <flux-caml@i...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Wanted: your feedback on the hierarchy of OCaml Batteries Included
Richard Jones <rich@annexia.org> writes:

> On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 10:56:18AM +0100, David Teller wrote:
>>  open System.IO;;
>>  open System.File;;
> Your biggest problem is using dot ('.') instead of underscore ('_').

However, this would take away some of the benefits. For example I
prefer using the least amount of opening of modules, to make it easier
to see where the values come from, and let module S = System would
give me both IO and File reachable through S.IO and S.File.

> Using a dot means that the System namespace cannot be extended by
> external packages.  If you use an underscore then an external package
> can extend the namespace (eg. by providing System_Newpackage)

I'm not sure how beneficial it would be that an external package can
extend the hierarchy anyway. Why cannot they simply be put into their
own module name space as they are now? If they aren't decidedly part
of the Batteries, then perhaps they shouldn't be placed under it; for
example, the documentation wouldn't be within Batteries documentation

     / __// /__ ____  __               http://www.modeemi.fi/~flux/\   \
    / /_ / // // /\ \/ /                                            \  /
   /_/  /_/ \___/ /_/\_\@modeemi.fi                                  \/