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 RAA18346; Mon, 10 Mar 2003 17:08:06 +0100 (MET) 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 RAA18773 for ; Mon, 10 Mar 2003 17:08:05 +0100 (MET) Received: from hirsch.in-berlin.de (hirsch.in-berlin.de [192.109.42.6]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id h2AG84X07027 for ; Mon, 10 Mar 2003 17:08:04 +0100 (MET) Received: from hirsch.in-berlin.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hirsch.in-berlin.de (8.12.8/8.12.8/Debian-2) with ESMTP id h2AG835w023326 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NOT) for ; Mon, 10 Mar 2003 17:08:04 +0100 Received: from first.UUCP (uucp@localhost) by hirsch.in-berlin.de (8.12.8/8.12.8/Debian-2) with UUCP id h2AG835Q023324 for inria.fr!caml-list; Mon, 10 Mar 2003 17:08:03 +0100 X-Envelope-From: oliver@first.in-berlin.de X-Envelope-To: inria.fr!caml-list Received: by first.in-berlin.de via sendmail from stdin id (Debian Smail3.2.0.114) Mon, 10 Mar 2003 17:07:51 +0100 (CET) From: oliver@first.in-berlin.de (Oliver Bandel) Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 17:07:51 +0100 To: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: [Caml-list] Hashtbl or Map? Message-ID: <20030310160750.GA654@first.in-berlin.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i X-Spam: no; 0.00; oliver:01 in-berlin:01 bandel:01 hashtbl:01 side-effect:01 functors:01 modules:02 interface:03 differences:04 seems:05 functional:06 uses:06 correctly:08 approach:08 tia:10 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk Hello, where is the difference between the modules Hashtbl and Map? Do I understand it correctly, that both are used for the same purpose, but Mao is side-effect free, wheras Hashtbl uses in-place-modufication and is not a functional approach (and therefore may cause problems sometimes)? And the interface seems to be different. (I have not explored functors in detail, so can you please show me the major differences in this approach?!) Are there other differences? Which? TIA, Oliver ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners