On 10 May 2012, at 14:22, Yitzhak Mandelbaum wrote: > Is there any "common wisdom" regarding the inclusion of optional functions in > a module signature? The two most obvious approaches involve 1) a pair of > boolean flag and a function, where the function raises an exception if > unimplemented OR 2) using the option type. I see pros/cons to each approach, > but am curious if there's any (unofficial) standard approach. >
I strongly favor option types over exceptions; in this case I would go for the option type and make the whole function "optional", not just its return type; e.g.: module MYSIG : sig ... val f : (int -> int -> int) option end best regards -Markus -- Markus Weißmann, M.Sc. Technische Universität München Institut für Informatik Boltzmannstr. 3 D-85748 Garching Germany http://wwwknoll.in.tum.de/ -- Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management and archives: https://sympa-roc.inria.fr/wws/info/caml-list Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs
