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 LAA27437; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 11:59:23 +0200 (MET DST) 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 LAA27341 for ; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 11:59:23 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from uni-sb.de (uni-sb.de [134.96.252.33]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f8B9xM108701 for ; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 11:59:22 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from cs.uni-sb.de (cs.uni-sb.de [134.96.252.31]) by uni-sb.de (8.11.6/2001082200) with ESMTP id f8B9xLP08359 for ; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 11:59:22 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail.cs.uni-sb.de (IDENT:1Meq0XjLpaQAXWiz5ClA968ArysnAcWf@mail.cs.uni-sb.de [134.96.254.200]) by cs.uni-sb.de (8.11.6/2001081600) with ESMTP id f8B9xKd15924 for ; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 11:59:21 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ps.uni-sb.de (grizzly.ps.uni-sb.de [134.96.186.68]) by mail.cs.uni-sb.de (8.11.6/2001082200) with ESMTP id f8B9xIo04956 for ; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 11:59:19 +0200 (CEST) X-Authentication-Warning: email: Host grizzly.ps.uni-sb.de [134.96.186.68] claimed to be ps.uni-sb.de Received: from ps.uni-sb.de (zoidberg.ps.uni-sb.de [134.96.186.121]) by ps.uni-sb.de (8.11.2/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f8B9xIt26305; Tue, 11 Sep 2001 11:59:18 +0200 Message-ID: <3B9DE076.568458F9@ps.uni-sb.de> Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2001 11:59:18 +0200 From: Andreas Rossberg Organization: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Universit=E4t?= des Saarlandes X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.3-12 i686) X-Accept-Language: de, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Style question References: <20010909132144.X7348-100000@shell5.ba.best.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk Brian Rogoff wrote: > > 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. It is not exactly sugar since you can express things with local that you cannot with signatures - but all of them are pretty useless. My personal opinion is that using modules is preferable even in SML, its local being an anachronism from the pre-module days, just like abstype. I almost never use it. It only comes in handy in conjunction with open: local open M in ... end Of course, in OCaml this is solved by having open vs. include. - Andreas -- Andreas Rossberg, rossberg@ps.uni-sb.de "Computer games don't affect kids; I mean if Pac Man affected us as kids, we would all be running around in darkened rooms, munching magic pills, and listening to repetitive electronic music." - Kristian Wilson, Nintendo Inc. ------------------- 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