@theindigamer: thanks. the links to anything outside this module are dead, because it's just one file uploaded for now. i suppose i should put the rest of the current manual in the same directory. also, ive since rewritten most of the function docs. i'll incorporate your feedback :) i hid the deprecated section on purpose, but ive since also put it back, without linking its subsections in the sidebar
basically, as suggested, only the intro parts of that were ready for consumption :)
Orbifx Anton Bachin (Gitter): is this how Lwt implements Lwt exceptions? https://hal.inria.fr/inria-00432575/document
(and separate the monads)
this basic error monad carries around
exn for errors, an open variant type
there is also
Lwt_result, which provides a separate error monad
with it, the user can choose what types to use for carrying around errors. they could be
string, or some inferred polymorphic variant, or an open variant, or anything else
yeah, just being thorough :)
see discourse topic here https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/lwt-3-2-0-released-we-plan-to-change-lwt-bind/1337
Actually, I've learned them both.
Lwt_log is easier to start with; Logs is better to elaborate on )
Orbifx: i don't know, it's the default room created by gitter
two of the plots in this graph effectively compare performance of lwt 3.1.0 to 3.2.0 https://github.com/ocsigen/lwt/pull/500#issuecomment-343535322
it looks unchanged
in my own measurements while making changes, the effects were something like small-percentage slowdowns of bind. given that bind is by far not the most common or time-intensive operation performed in an lwt program, i also expected there to be no real effect
@argent-smith i believe all the breaking changes are the ones listed in the changelog here https://github.com/ocsigen/lwt/releases/tag/3.0.0, also you can see details here ocsigen/lwt#308
if anything else broke, it's an accident, and we are not aware of any such accidents
Orbifx Ocsigen*
smondet both are low traffic, but stuff still happens
Orbifx Anton Bachin (Gitter): is there a particular reason for choosing MIT? something tactical?
smondet Orbifx: my 2c: In Ocaml since linking is static, it cannot really be LGPL, it kinda has to be LGPL+Linking-exn. which is a hack that maybe some INRIA lawyer checked in like 1994, but that adds a ton weirdness to an already pretty crazy license (have you tried to read the LGPL itself?).
Orbifx smondet: I have read some of it and about it in the past. ALso, forgot that OCaml does static linking so I can see the issue
Orbifx: no really specific reason for choosing MIT. just several people have requested it, and i agree that LGPL + some exception is a strange license. even if the ocaml community is used to that, it creates questions for new users that are not from elsewhere in the ocaml community
i don't think Lwt gains anything by having a copyleft license in practice, but we gain clarity for users by switching to a permissive license
after that, the choice of MIT is kind of arbitrary
smondet: +1
Orbifx: by the way, we switched Bisect_ppx to MPL 2.0, because it seemed like a good license that has the best features of copyleft and permissive licenses
however, it seems complex and unfamiliar enough that people still have issues. my impression from that experiment is that since we don't intend to go after anyone anyway, it's best to switch Bisect_ppx to MIT at some point