4 ms·
> I'm actually meeting our editor (Andy Oram) in a couple of weeks at OSCON to discuss just this. Great to hear that! > What aspects of the module system woul
by jallmann 12y ago
> I'm actually meeting our editor (Andy Oram) in a couple of weeks at OSCON to discuss just this.
Great to hear that!
> What aspects of the module system would you like to see more of?
The book is actually comprehensive in this respect, but the module system is just a lot to digest. I'm not actually an expert, so I really don't know what could/should be done, only that sometimes it takes me a while to figure out "best practices", or what's required by the compiler, or the semantic implications of some of the more unfamiliar syntax. For example, recently I saw:
module Client : module type of Client.Make(IO)
which differs from the "module type of" usage discussed in the book. The OCaml module system is extremely rich, with a learning curve to match. I don't really feel that I know how to exploit the system to its fullest just yet. Maybe a section on common patterns or best practices would be helpful.
On a side note, thanks for all your effort, not just on the book but also in keeping the OCaml community vibrant. I wouldn't be nearly as interested without all the work that's going on now.
- avsm 12y agoThanks, that's all very useful feedback. There have been several significant improvements to the module system in 4.02 (including generative functors and module aliases [1] in signatures), so I agree that there's quite a bit more to write about. We have a very short section on common patterns that could perhaps be expanded into a chapter. [1] https://blogs.janestreet.com/better-namespaces-through-module-aliases/ https://blogs.janestreet.com/better-namespaces-through-modul...