Re: [Caml-list] We need a rich standard library distributed with OCaml, really

[Oliver Bandel <oliver@first.in-berlin.de>]

Zitat von Emmanuel Surleau <emmanuel.surleau@gmail.com> (Mon, 31 Aug  
2015 17:05:30 +0200)

> On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 2:37 PM, Jon Harrop <jon@ffconsultancy.com> wrote:
>
>> David MENTRÉ:
>> > That's said, an interesting step might not be to include other libraries
>> but the mechanism to install them, i.e. opam.
>>
>> I think that is exactly the right thing to do. This is a packaging issue,
>> not a language issue.
>>
>
> Including OPAM does not address the issue of standardized data types for
> things that everybody needs. You still have many different ways of
> streaming data, of storing time, etc.
[...]

So, this could mean including signatures (not structures/implementations)
for these application domains to be included in the OCaml-distribution.
So that the signatures are equal for all, but the implementation is up  
to (can be done by)
external libs (but need to match the signatures from (the future)  
OCaml-distribution)?

Something like signature-proposals from INRIA.

This would have the advantage of central (coordinated) types in OCaml  
projects,
without eating up the time of the OCaml-core-developers to implement  
the structures too.
IMHO this also could show the power of OCaml's module language...


Ciao,
    Oliver