Agreed that concision is not an absolute value. As I wrote in the next line in the article:
There are, of course, limits: no good is done by reducing all your function names to single characters, but brevity is nonetheless important, and OCaml does a lot to help keep the codebase small.
And yet, I would argue that OCaml gives you concision in a way that enhances rather than detracts from readability. There's a limit to how convincing any 3000-word article can be on the topic. If you really want to understand the difference, you need to spend real time with a language like OCaml and see what it lets you do.
Slashdot Mirror
Should be fixed now!
And yet, I would argue that OCaml gives you concision in a way that enhances rather than detracts from readability. There's a limit to how convincing any 3000-word article can be on the topic. If you really want to understand the difference, you need to spend real time with a language like OCaml and see what it lets you do.