> On 14 Oct 2016, at 15:31, Hannes Mehnert <han...@mehnert.org> wrote: > > [again raising the issue: could some mailing list admin please set the > reply-to to the list -- there's no need to send the message to the > individual and to the list!] > > On 14/10/2016 15:23, Anil Madhavapeddy wrote: >> On 14 Oct 2016, at 15:11, Hannes Mehnert <han...@mehnert.org> wrote: >>> >>> On 14/10/2016 15:08, Anil Madhavapeddy wrote: >>>> Yeah, once we agree on the conventions :-) Once we have everything using >>>> Result.t, we also need to find the right set of combinators. >>>> >>>> - There is Rresult for basic Result.t handling: >>>> http://erratique.ch/software/rresult/doc/Rresult.html >>>> - Lwt_result has a slightly different set of combinators >>>> https://github.com/ocsigen/lwt/blob/master/src/core/lwt_result.mli >>>> >>>> So I guess we need to decide if we publish an Rresult_lwt.t which lifts up >>>> "('a,'b) result" into an Lwt.t with the same API as Rresult otherwise. >>> >>> Based on earlier discussion from January 2015, I put some combinators in >>> mirage-types.lwt (maybe they should live elsewhere) >>> https://github.com/hannesm/mirage/blob/network-error/types/runtime.lwt/m_infix.mli >> >> Ah, missed those, thanks! >> >> Looks like we have a number of different conventions for the binds. Do we >> want to have the same set of operators with and without Lwt support (and >> open the Infix module locally as needed) or separate operators that be used >> alongside each other? > > My experience (reading other people's code, see e.g. [0]) is that > overloading the syntax of bind is bad, since it is hard to comprehend > locally. > > Certainly, pure libraries not using Lwt can easily reuse >>= and >|=, > but as soon as you depend on both Lwt.t and result, I'd prefer to have > new character sequences for the binds (and not numerous `let open ___ > in`). The >>=? and >>|? originate from Ashish' suggestion > (https://lists.xenproject.org/archives/html/mirageos-devel/2015-02/msg00019.html) > -- I'm open to any suggestions about the specific character sequences, > as long as we can agree on some.
This convention seems reasonable to me, and I agree about the confusion about overloading bind. -anil _______________________________________________ MirageOS-devel mailing list MirageOS-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mirageos-devel
