On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 12:31:47PM +0100, Daniel Bünzli wrote:
I disagree. Having to invoke a tool to know where an identifier comes
from when I read code involves one more (superfluous IMHO) action. Not
to mention that I do sometimes print code on real paper to read it.
Fair enough.
Once
On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 11:41:03AM +, Richard Jones wrote:
The most straightforward solution to this problem to me looks like
providing a syntax equivalent like from Module import foo, bar
which selectively imports only some identifiers from a given module.
Again, Perl gets this
On 20 November 2008 10:49, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 10:33:03AM +, Richard Jones wrote:
Encouraging developers to open modules is also usually a bad idea,
except in very limited circumstances (hello Printf).
Why? You and others failed me to convince of this. Or,
Le 20 nov. 08 à 11:49, Stefano Zacchiroli a écrit :
Problem 1) once you open you loose the information where an identifier
comes from. True, but it is a tool deficiency, not an intrinsic
deficiency.
I disagree. Having to invoke a tool to know where an identifier comes
from when I read
On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 11:49:14AM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 10:33:03AM +, Richard Jones wrote:
Encouraging developers to open modules is also usually a bad idea,
except in very limited circumstances (hello Printf).
Why? You and others failed me to
On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 11:29:44AM -, David Allsopp wrote:
Consider
open Array;;
open List;;
(* Hundreds of lines of code *)
length [];;
Oh god yes, I was bitten by almost this just a few days ago, except my
code was:
open Printf
open Format
(*...*)
printf I'm trying to
Excerpts from David Allsopp's message of Thu Nov 20 11:29:44 UTC 2008:
On 20 November 2008 10:49, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 10:33:03AM +, Richard Jones wrote:
Encouraging developers to open modules is also usually a bad idea,
except in very limited
Excerpts from Nicolas Pouillard's message of Thu Nov 20 14:01:53 +0100 2008:
Excerpts from David Allsopp's message of Thu Nov 20 11:29:44 UTC 2008:
On 20 November 2008 10:49, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 10:33:03AM +, Richard Jones wrote:
Encouraging developers
Consider
open Array;;
open List;;
I doubt anyone is recommending this. The module design dictates, to some
extent, whether the module should be opened. Array and List clearly should
not since they have commonly used function names. However, the proposed
Data.Containers certainly should be
On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 02:41:12PM +0100, Nicolas Pouillard wrote:
Given the crowd of people wanting it, I've added a link [1] to the
camlp4 wiki [2] :)
Erm, given the crowd of people wanting it, what about including it in
legacy camlp4? :-)
--
Stefano Zacchiroli -o- PhD in Computer Science \
On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 11:29:44AM -, David Allsopp wrote:
Why? You and others failed me to convince of this. Or, better, I'm
sure there are problems with that, but they just show deficiencies
inherited from other parts of the language.
Consider
open Array;;
open List;;
You are
On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 11:48:57AM +, Richard Jones wrote:
open Printf
open Format
Let me stress once more that the Batteries hierarchy is not
advertising anything like that. What is advertising (modulo syntax
extensions helping out) is to open partial module paths which just
contain
12 matches
Mail list logo
