Why We Use OCaml

#1

Post by ALee » Wed, Jul 16, 2014, 6:31 PM UTC

Re: Why We Use OCaml

#2

Post by vvijay03 » Wed, Jul 16, 2014, 6:52 PM UTC

Good read. I really liked how the author concretely defined the things they use in OCaml, instead of just saying "functional programming" and waving their hands.

Re: Why We Use OCaml

#3

Post by toby » Wed, Jul 16, 2014, 7:07 PM UTC

What are some advantages of OCaml over Haskell?

Re: Why We Use OCaml

#4

Post by IvarTJ » Wed, Jul 16, 2014, 7:07 PM UTC

Could someone comment on what instances you would typically apply lambdas and closures in real-world code?

I figure that they are at least more convenient than callbacks with a *userData parameter like in C.

Re: Why We Use OCaml

#5

Post by kenko » Wed, Jul 16, 2014, 7:09 PM UTC

From the "About" page: "We want to see a world where everyone gets the mental luxury of an assistant, including the assistant. We are making this future happen. [...] Oh, did we mention every team member gets an assistant?"

So ... there's some kind of cycle of assistants, where X is my assistant, Y is X's assistant, and I'm Y's assistant? Esper currently employs infinity people? Assistants are employees but not, you know, team members?

Re: Why We Use OCaml

#6

Post by edwintorok » Wed, Jul 16, 2014, 7:10 PM UTC

toby wrote: post #3

What are some advantages of OCaml over Haskell?

Haskell uses lazy evaluation by default, which makes it hard to reason about the space usage (or termination) of a particular program. OCaml on the other hand is not lazy by default (but supports it if you need it). At least that is one of the reasons why I chose to learn more OCaml than Haskell.

Re: Why We Use OCaml

#7

Post by edwintorok » Wed, Jul 16, 2014, 7:15 PM UTC

IvarTJ wrote: post #4

Could someone comment on what instances you would typically apply lambdas and closures in real-world code? I figure that they are at least more convenient than callbacks with a *userData parameter like in C.

As argument to a 'map' function for example.

Re: Why We Use OCaml

#8

Post by S4M » Wed, Jul 16, 2014, 7:15 PM UTC

kenko wrote: post #5

From the "About" page: "We want to see a world where everyone gets the mental luxury of an assistant, including the assistant. We are making this future happen. [...] Oh, did we mention every team member gets an assistant?" So ... there's some kind of cycle of assistants, where X is my assistant, Y is X's assistant, and I'm Y's assistant? Esper currently employs infinity people? Assistants are employees but not, you…

The assistants mentioned in the About page are electronic, not real persons, and I suppose that it's the product Esper is building. I'm not affiliated with them in any way but I like the concept.

Re: Why We Use OCaml

#9

Post by agumonkey » Wed, Jul 16, 2014, 7:20 PM UTC

IvarTJ wrote: post #4

Could someone comment on what instances you would typically apply lambdas and closures in real-world code? I figure that they are at least more convenient than callbacks with a *userData parameter like in C.

Each time you want to write such callback, you'll need a special userData struct right ? otherwise you'll have a generic bag and lose typechecking.

Let's say Closures are free typed anonymously defined structs.

Re: Why We Use OCaml

#10

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Jul 16, 2014, 7:25 PM UTC

kenko wrote: post #5

From the "About" page: "We want to see a world where everyone gets the mental luxury of an assistant, including the assistant. We are making this future happen. [...] Oh, did we mention every team member gets an assistant?" So ... there's some kind of cycle of assistants, where X is my assistant, Y is X's assistant, and I'm Y's assistant? Esper currently employs infinity people? Assistants are employees but not, you…

[deleted]