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
[Caml-list] [ANN] The Missing Library
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: 2004-04-26 (14:27)
From: Nicolas Cannasse <warplayer@f...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Re: Common IO structure
> > What I want is more than that.  I want that we agree some minimal set
> > of methods for IO channles, and agree to accept such an IO channel as
> > an argument for our library functions, or provide a converter to a
> > native IO channel of the library.
> All this seems reasonable.
> Note that Format also uses [spaces] and [newline], but there are
> reasonable defaults for them.
> This also emphasizes one of the advantages of objects: since their
> types can be compared for equality, several libraries can use the same
> type without requiring a common header (that is, if everybody agrees
> on the interface, as you suggest).

Is there any chance of getting the same behavior with records ?
Records are currently module-bounded, if Ocaml was enabling structural
comparison (even without subtyping) it would be very useful.

Best Regards,
Nicolas Cannasse

To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners