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: | Benedikt Grundmann <benedikt.grundmann@g...> |
| Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] Wanted: your feedback on the hierarchy of OCaml Batteries Included |
Somehow I forgot reply back when you posted this reply. And I was just reminded when I read this: "Batteries is meant to serve the following purposes: [snip] provide consistent abstractions and APIs for otherwise independent libraries. " on http://wiki.cocan.org/events/europe/ocamlmeetinggrenoble2009 How can you expect to provide consistent abstractions if you are not willing to make those decisions? Cheers, Bene 2008/11/18 David Teller <David.Teller@univ-orleans.fr>: > 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. > > -- Calvin: I try to make everyone's day a little more surreal. (From Calvin & Hobbes)