From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id XAA29162; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 23:00:10 +0200 (MET DST)
X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f
Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id XAA28918 for <caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr>; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 23:00:09 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from shell5.ba.best.com (shell5.ba.best.com [206.184.139.136])
	by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f89L08v16869
	for <caml-list@inria.fr>; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 23:00:08 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from localhost (bpr@localhost)
	by shell5.ba.best.com (8.9.3/8.9.2/best.sh) with ESMTP id OAA17264
	for <caml-list@inria.fr>; Sun, 9 Sep 2001 14:00:06 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2001 14:00:06 -0700 (PDT)
From: Brian Rogoff <bpr@best.com>
To: <caml-list@inria.fr>
Subject: [Caml-list] Style question
Message-ID: <20010909132144.X7348-100000@shell5.ba.best.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr
Precedence: bulk

I've been hacking a bit with SML lately and I notice that a lot of
SML code uses the local <private fundefs> in <public fundefs> end
construct. Do SMLers who like this and wind up writing OCaml use
modules for this? Something like

module SomeDefs : sig
  <public fundecls>
end = struct
  <private fundefs>
  <public fundefs>
end
(* <open or include> SomeDefs, or just use SomeDefs.f ... *)

or is the slight extra verbosity a disincentive?

It seems to me that all of the uses of local in SML can be handled can be
handled by the module system in OCaml, and I don't even find the unsugared
forms to be bad at all.

-- Brian


-------------------
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs  FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr  Archives: http://caml.inria.fr