On 3 Oct 2009, at 18:27, blue storm wrote:
On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 2:16 PM, Anil Madhavapeddy
wrote:
The only thing I haven't quite worked out yet is the quotation to
pattern-match type applications to detect things like "(string, unit)
Hashtbl.t" the way the current json-static does via the g
On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 2:16 PM, Anil Madhavapeddy wrote:
> The only thing I haven't quite worked out yet is the quotation to
> pattern-match type applications to detect things like "(string, unit)
> Hashtbl.t" the way the current json-static does via the grammar extension.
> -anil
Below are two p
On 24 Sep 2009, at 13:19, Martin Jambon wrote:
Oh yes, there's type-conv too. I don't know the pros and cons of
using either
type-conv or deriving. If anyone knows, a brief comparison would be
helpful.
The nice thing about using type-conv is that syntax extensions can be
composed qui
On Thu, 24 Sep 2009 14:02:14 +0200
blue storm wrote:
> What about factorising json-static to allow adding arbitrary code
> generators (represented as functions from (string * type_def) list to
> a camlp4 Ast) at camlp4-time ? You would have a design similar to
> type-conv, wich allows adding new
blue storm wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 1:18 PM, Martin Jambon
> wrote:
>> Yes, patching the original code of json-static would work but it's not ideal.
>
>>From the example given, it seems that the original poster already uses
> json-static. In that case, I think that reusing the code logic
On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 1:18 PM, Martin Jambon
wrote:
> Yes, patching the original code of json-static would work but it's not ideal.
>From the example given, it seems that the original poster already uses
json-static. In that case, I think that reusing the code logic is a
good idea (coherent beh
blue storm wrote:
> In case it helps, below is a basic patch against json-static (SVN
> trunk, 3.10 version). On your example it produces the following code :
[...]
Yes, patching the original code of json-static would work but it's not ideal.
Maybe Deriving is a better choice (http://code.google.
In case it helps, below is a basic patch against json-static (SVN
trunk, 3.10 version). On your example it produces the following code :
let javadef_of_create_order_response =
"public class Create_order_response {\n\tprivate int
order_id;\n\tprivate String order_code;\n\tprivate int
order_price;
Mykola Stryebkov wrote:
> Hi, Richard.
>
> On 23 Вер 2009, at 22:57, Richard Jones wrote:
> I'm going to use stringing bits of text together. But text generating
> is not an issue here. The issue is how to make this stringing driven by
> description of ocaml records.
camlp4 would be the neate
Hi, Richard.
On 23 Вер 2009, at 22:57, Richard Jones wrote:
On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 09:15:08PM +0300, Mykola Stryebkov wrote:
I need to generate arbitrary text (more specifically, Java code) from
Ocaml structures, pretty similar to how json-static lib generates
ocaml code from ocaml structures
On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 09:15:08PM +0300, Mykola Stryebkov wrote:
> I need to generate arbitrary text (more specifically, Java code) from
> Ocaml structures, pretty similar to how json-static lib generates
> ocaml code from ocaml structures.
>
> Which approach would you recommend?
> Is it poss
Hi,
I need to generate arbitrary text (more specifically, Java code) from
Ocaml structures, pretty similar to how json-static lib generates
ocaml code from ocaml structures.
Which approach would you recommend?
Is it possible to use ocamlp4 for it?
--
Mykola Stryebkov
Blog: http://mykola.or
12 matches
Mail list logo
