Re: [Caml-list] non-exported functions

[Richard Jones <rich@annexia.org>]

On Thu, Oct 30, 2003 at 05:25:47AM +1100, skaller wrote:
> Aw, its kind of annoying. Two or three extra keywords might 
> fix 95% of cases:
> 
> 	let private x = ...
>
> Just don't put x in the interface
>
> 	type abstract x = ..
> 
> put x in the interface as
> 
> 	type x

This is a good idea (although in practice writing .mli files isn't too
much of a bind for me). Still, every little bit helps.

For classes I've started ALWAYS doing .mli files because that way you
can control private/protected/public methods very accurately. See the
other thread on this issue.

Rich.

-- 
Richard Jones. http://www.annexia.org/ http://freshmeat.net/users/rwmj
Merjis Ltd. http://www.merjis.com/ - all your business data are belong to you.
'There is a joke about American engineers and French engineers. The
American team brings a prototype to the French team. The French team's
response is: "Well, it works fine in practice; but how will it hold up
in theory?"'

-------------------
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