Brought to you by the ocaml gang
Brought to you by the ocaml gang
You're viewing a single thread.
13 comments
-
rudt has implicit typing by default for variables tho...?
-
Yeah but it doesn't cross function boundaries so it's more limited.
-
In other words, in OCaml, you don't have to write type annotations into the function parameter list. It will infer even those.
It's useful for small ad-hoc functions, but personally, I'm glad that Rust is more explicit here.
-
yeah structs, consts ets should always be explicit, prevents a lot oh headache
also, for adhoc stuff rust has closures which can be fully inferred (but you need to convert them to explicit function pointers for storage in structs/consts)
-
-
It's not like it's more limited, it's just so that it can yell at you when you return not what you said you're going to, IMO
-
OCaml allows you to specify return types, but doesn't force you to.
-
-
-
13 comments