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: 2008-12-19 (11:00)
From: Benedikt Grundmann <benedikt.grundmann@g...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Wanted: your feedback on the hierarchy of OCaml Batteries Included
Somehow I forgot reply back when you posted this reply.  And I was just
reminded when I read this:

"Batteries is meant to serve the following purposes:
provide consistent abstractions and APIs for otherwise independent libraries.


How can you expect to provide consistent abstractions if you are
not willing to make those decisions?



2008/11/18 David Teller <>:
> Ok, that's an interesting point. Now, we just need to all agree on one
> standard :)
> On Tue, 2008-11-18 at 12:28 +0000, Benedikt Grundmann wrote:
>> > Do you see any better way of managing the complexity of all this?
>> Yes don't introduce it at all, make a decision to use or not use labels
>> and stick with it.  Similarly make a decision to use or not use exceptions
>> as the "default", suffix / rename alternative functions as appropriate
>> (consistently). Consistency is a big win.  Not only as it speeds you up
>> when you read/modify other people's code it also reduces the amount
>> of decisions you have to do when writing new code.
>> Cheers,
>> Bene
> --
> David Teller-Rajchenbach
>  Security of Distributed Systems
>  Angry researcher: French Universities need reforms, but the LRU act brings liquidations.

Calvin: I try to make everyone's day a little more

(From Calvin & Hobbes)