• voxel
    link
    fedilink
    372 years ago

    rudt has implicit typing by default for variables tho…?

      • @Knusper@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        232 years ago

        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.

        • voxel
          link
          fedilink
          6
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          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)

      • @fl42v@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        5
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        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

  • @Magister@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    42 years ago

    I remember learning Caml in (French) university in 1996, it was brand new and from INRIA guys, I understood about nothing about it :)

    • @Knusper@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      192 years ago

      The initial creator of Rust, Graydon Hoare, took lots of inspiration from OCaml. In fact, the first Rust compiler was written in OCaml.

    • @charje@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      12 years ago

      JS doesn’t do any type inference. Ocaml Connor l type checker knows all the types and is completely type safe without type annotations.