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
Re: [Caml-list] A G'Caml question" + additional info
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: 2001-07-14 (03:01)
From: Alexander V. Voinov <avv@q...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] A G'Caml question" + additional info

John Max Skaller wrote:
> "Krishnaswami, Neel" wrote:
> > Permit me to disagree. I find nearly all of OCaml's features highly
> > useful and orthogonal, and I am only working on medium size projects.
> I don't find that is entirely true.
> First, there is quite a bit of sugar, such as fun/function/match,
> if then else vs. matching.
> I'm NOT complaining, just disagreeing.
> In my current project, I've been sticking to the basic
> feature set. But I'm stronly tempted to switch to polymorphic
> variants, because they'd provide much better typing for
> my application. ....

And in general, redundancy is certainly not an ontological evil when it
is properly structured. Otherwise we wouldn't make any use of poetry.

Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs  FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr  Archives: http://caml.inria.fr