Re: [Caml-list] [ANN] ppx_deriving 0.1

[Peter Zotov <whitequark@whitequark.org>]

On 2014-07-23 18:36, Yotam Barnoy wrote:
> Very nice.
> 
> I've never used any of the deriving extensions before, but I have an
> aesthetic suggestions.

I humbly suggest trying to use it before proposing aesthetic changes.

> Would it perhaps make sense to generate a
> module per derived type? For example a type t would generate a module
> T_ (the underscore or any other suffix would reduce mixups with
> pre-existing modules). You could then use code such as
> 
> 'if T_.(a = b && b = c) ...'
> 
> or  'T_.show x ...'
> 
> which allows you to keep the infix notation for = which is important
> IMO.
> 
> You could even generate T_ as having internal Eq, Ord, and Show
> modules (as requested by the user), which would be included in the T_
> module. This would allow you to easily pass them as first class
> modules to functions accepting Eq, Ord or Show signatures.

I believe this is best left to the upcoming implicits, which will
hopefully be merged soon.

I have based the current design on existing patterns across OCaml
ecosystem; I don't want to change the way people structure their
modules, I want to reduce the amount of boilerplate to write.

-- 
Peter Zotov
sip:whitequark@sipnet.ru