English version
Accueil     À propos     Téléchargement     Ressources     Contactez-nous    
Browse thread
interest in a much simpler, but modern, Caml?
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: -- (:)
From: Jeremy Bem <jeremy1@g...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] interest in a much simpler, but modern, Caml?
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 4:53 PM, Nicolas Pouillard <
nicolas.pouillard@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sun, 08 Aug 2010 20:52:53 +0200, Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>
> wrote:
> > * Jeremy Bem:
> >
> > > Yes and no, respectively.  In other words, nothing new here.
> >
> > Oh.  I just happen to think that those two are very high on the list
> > of things you want to fix once you can start with a clean slate.
> >
> > > Is there a better approach to polymorphic equality floating around?
> >
> > Besides type classes?  I'm not sure.  It's probably possible to remove
> > this feature from the language, with a little bit of syntactic
> > overhead to pass around a matching comparison function.
>
> Yes for instance the very concise local opening notation comes in handy
> here:
>
> if Int.(x = 42) then ... else ...
>

That's very nice.  I don't think type classes are conservative enough for
this project, but this comes very close indeed.

I haven't really had a chance to explore OCaml 3.12 yet, as it came out
while I was working on this, but I will give this serious consideration.

-Jeremy