Version française
Home     About     Download     Resources     Contact us    
Browse thread
WAS Re: [Caml-list] Re: The need to specify 'rec' in a recursive function defintion
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: -- (:)
From: Jon Harrop <jon@f...>
Subject: Re: WAS Re: [Caml-list] Re: The need to specify 'rec' in a recursive function defintion
On Tuesday 16 February 2010 16:47:03 Grant Rettke wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 10:21 AM, Ashish Agarwal <agarwal1975@gmail.com> 
wrote:
> > let rec
>
> Do OCaml'er look at let rec more as being a message to the programmer,
> rather than the compiler, that the way I want to define this function
> is recursively so even if 'f' was previously bound you know which one
> I mean?

I see it as resolving an ambiguity for both the programmer and compiler. There 
are alternatives as others have mentioned but none seem particularly good or 
bad to me. Moreover, the burden of "rec" is tiny so I don't think it is worth 
discussing in such detail.

-- 
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e