Re: [Caml-list] Detecting missed checks for error indications in ML code

[Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@web.de>]

> But OCaml isn't just only a functional language.
> It's also a typed language. And the type system can help you at this point.
> You can use the option-type for indicating missing data.

I am looking more for possibilities to avoid missed checks for return values
from some function calls.


>> I got the impression that corresponding error checks can occasionally be missing.
>> How do you think about to detect such cases by advanced source code analysis?
>
> No need to thest these kind of problems, as long as you use the type
> system to help you as mentioned above.

Can it still happen then to overlook desirable checking of provided data?


> Since a while OCaml also offers a result-type, which you can use.

Do any programming interfaces need still to work without this special data type?


> It might be better than the option type in more general cases.
> And if predefined types don't offer what you are looking for,
> just define your own type.

Customised types can be constructed only for new programming interfaces.
Would you like to offer any companion functions for safer API variants?

Regards,
Markus