Subject: another approach to sprintf (Re: ocaml 2.02 bug: curried printf)
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 12 Mar 1999 16:00:17 +0100"
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 1999 17:47:20 +0900
From: Eijiro Sumii <email@example.com>
(Excuse me for changing the subject and providing no French
I don't know very much about *printf in ocaml, but how about Olivier
Danvy's approach to sprintf (http://www.brics.dk/RS/98/12/index.html)?
It seems safer and faster than ordinary "interpretive" approach. I'd
like to hear what do you (I mean, readers of this mailing list) think
> Subject: Re: ocaml 2.02 bug: curried printf
> From: Xavier Leroy <Xavier.Leroy@inria.fr>
> Date: Fri, 12 Mar 1999 16:00:17 +0100
> We can go back to the 2.01 implementation of sprintf, of course, but
> it's less efficient than the one based on extensible buffers, and also
> prevents interesting code sharing between sprintf and bprintf.
> The alternative is to keep a buffer-based sprintf that is efficient
> and consistent with printf ("consistent" in the sense of "as weird as"),
> but is not really usable in partial application contexts.
> Any opinions?
// Eijiro Sumii <firstname.lastname@example.org>
// Kobayashi Laboratory, Department of Information Science,
// Graduate School of Science, University of Tokyo
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jan 02 2000 - 11:58:21 MET