Version française
Home     About     Download     Resources     Contact us    

This site is updated infrequently. For up-to-date information, please visit the new OCaml website at

Browse thread
Wanted: your feedback on the hierarchy of OCaml Batteries Included
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: 2008-11-19 (14:30)
From: Daniel_Bünzli <daniel.buenzli@e...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Wanted: your feedback on the hierarchy of OCaml Batteries Included
> Yes, but that's not a good reason to give up hierarchies completely.  
> The advantage of hierarchies is to have less top-level roots, which  
> reduce the likelihood of clashes with external libraries.

I think that the name clash problem is overblown. Really.

Would it arise concretly I prefer developer cooperation rather than  
have the problem solved beforehand by forcing a bureaucracy on me (and  
even the hierarchy cannot prevent the problem completely).

Besides in batteries the maintainers control everything that is below  
the Batteries module so it is their duty to avoid clashes in their  
name space and would a clash with an external library B occur I can  
use Batteries.B to refer to the battery one.

Someone mentionned python's library, if it corresponds to this [1],  
then I see no hierarchy there (OTOH nobody tells me that python users  
are actually screaming for a hierarchy on their list).