Jacques Garrigue writes:
> From: Pierre Weis <Pierre.Weis@inria.fr>
> > * undesired labels: in many cases I don't want to have labels just
> > because I don't want to remember their names. (E.g., I very often
> > mispell the label acc since I've always used accu to name an
> > accumulator; furthermore, when I do not mispell this label, I feel
> > acc:accu extremely verbose). Also because labels are verbose at
> > application.
>
> Isn't there a classic mode for that?
Something I do not understand: how could I use Labltk, for which I want
to be modern, and List.fold_right, for which I do not want labels, in the
same file ?
By the way, the label "acc" (or even "accu") does not mean anything for me
in fold_right: the iterator associates one function to each
constructor of the type so I would prefer
val fold_right: cons:(hd:'a -> tl:'b -> 'b) -> nil:'b -> list:'a list -> 'b
[...]
> It would cost nothing to add 4 more unlabelled functions to the List
> module.
Please add a smiley when you write such a sentence !
[...]
> Or do you think that the problem is deeper, and that labels are
> breaking the foundations of the language ?
Please ! The debate is about presence of labels in the standard library,
not in the language.
Today, it is possible to teach Ocaml without speaking about objects,
modules (functors are not so common in libraries), streams, etc. If labels
are in the standard library you will have to explain one more (nice
and not so simple) feature before being able to use one
simple list iterator ...
Amicalement
--Pascal
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Mar 22 2000 - 17:10:11 MET