ML-style module systems are lots of fun haha
Conversation
Being able to separate interfaces from implementations, and hide internal representations is so powerful. I wish more people knew about this stuff! I find OCaml's implementation clunky in many ways, but yeah, I still really like it in general. :)
I dunno much of the difference, although I think I'd probably prefer OCaml's. By clunky I'm referring to the syntax, the way you are expected to ‘open’ modules, and the stratification of the core and module languages (although OCaml breaks this slightly in places).
1
Show replies
Replying to
Standard ML and Ocaml have the best module systems I've ever come across, and cannot be praised without mentioning functors. I've loved them even more since Ocaml added local opens (which Merlin supports beautifully).
1
Now I just want to know how typeclasses can be added in a way that respects the sort of modularity that Ocaml demands, whilst respecting canonicity and preventing orphans. Not sure where we're at with those constraints.
2
Show replies