On Wed, Apr 12, 2000 at 11:15:04AM +0930, Dennis (Gang) Chen wrote:
> > Don't forget that there is (almost) no restriction on side-effects in
> > Caml: if this is crucial for your program, you can implement lists as
> > an imperative data type of your own, and then use destructive update
> > to perform the deletion operation in the required complexity. Just be
> > aware that list sharing will be difficult as for any other imperative
> > implementation of lists.
>
> This is true. But such an approach does not make ocaml
> more attractive than C++. In ocaml, there are arrays, structures
> and objects etc, but no such things like pointers in C.
I'm not sure I understand what features of pointers in C you want. Yes,
arbitrary pointer arithmetic is not available. But, when you work with
mutable data structures in ocaml, the things you assign behave a lot like
pointers in C or C++.
Dave Brown
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Apr 13 2000 - 10:20:55 MET DST