Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: "ocaml_beginners"::[] Is it "poor taste" to include type information in function definitions?

Expand Messages
  • Dario Teixeira
    Hi, ... Sylvain and Martin have already mentioned the few cases where declaring function signatures is required and/or sensible in Ocaml. As to the matter of
    Message 1 of 5 , Mar 31, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi,

      > Is it "poor taste" to include type information in function definitions?

      Sylvain and Martin have already mentioned the few cases where declaring
      function signatures is required and/or sensible in Ocaml. As to the matter
      of "taste", note that this practice is not idiomatic in Ocaml, in contrast
      to Haskell where it seems current. I'm not sure if that's your case, but
      people coming to Ocaml from Haskell may at first tend to exaggerate on
      this aspect...

      Cheers,
      Dario Teixeira
    • Grant Rettke
      ... Thanks everyone. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Message 2 of 5 , Apr 3, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 1:28 PM, Dario Teixeira <darioteixeira@...>wrote:

        > Sylvain and Martin have already mentioned the few cases where declaring
        > function signatures is required and/or sensible in Ocaml. As to the matter
        > of "taste", note that this practice is not idiomatic in Ocaml, in contrast
        > to Haskell where it seems current. I'm not sure if that's your case, but
        > people coming to Ocaml from Haskell may at first tend to exaggerate on
        > this aspect...
        >

        Thanks everyone.


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.