“附带 OCaml 电池”的稳定性和普及程度如何？推荐吗？
在使用 SML、Haskell 和 F# 多年之后，我刚刚回到 OCaml 进行一个新的小型研究项目。
我很快发现自己在使用 OCaml 库时错过了一些东西，而且我还错过了单子推导式的语法。
OCaml 随附电池似乎正好填补了这些空白。但我有点不确定它是否已经达到了对于这个项目来说足够成熟、稳定和广泛的程度。我的部分怀疑来自于安装时遇到的一些问题 - 包括发现目前的安装说明已经过时，并且只有通过谷歌搜索最终找到了对支持请求的响应，解释了所需的内容。
电池相对稳定吗？ （或者至少比上面建议的更稳定？） 它的使用相对广泛吗？ （例如，10% 的新 OCaml 代码是使用它编写的吗？）
推荐用于哪些类型的项目？
（并且，特别建议用于中小型研究项目，该项目应该产生一个可能会维护一段时间的小型图书馆。）
还有其他建议吗？
I'm just getting back into OCaml for a new small research project after many years of SML, Haskell and F#.
I quickly found myself missing some things when using the OCaml libraries, and I also missed having a syntax for monadic comprehensions.
OCaml Batteries Included seems to fill exactly these gaps. But I'm a little unsure whether it has reached the point of being mature, stable and widespread enough for this project. Part of my doubt comes from having a number of hiccups when installing it - including discovering that currently the installation instructions are out of date, and it was only by Googling that eventually found a response to a support request that explained what was required.
Is Batteries relatively stable? (Or at least more stable than the above would suggest?)
Is its use relatively widespread? (E.g., is 10% of new OCaml code written using it?)
What kinds of projects would it be recommended for?
(And, in particular would it be recommended for a small-medium sized research project that should yield a small library that likely would be maintained for some time.)
Any other recommendations?
如果你对这篇内容有疑问，欢迎到本站社区发帖提问 参与讨论，获取更多帮助，或者扫码二维码加入 Web 技术交流群。
绑定邮箱获取回复消息
由于您还没有绑定你的真实邮箱，如果其他用户或者作者回复了您的评论，将不能在第一时间通知您！
发布评论
评论（2）
半免责声明：我是 Batteries Included 的当前开发人员之一。
据我所知，它还没有得到很大的采用。我还没有看到任何依赖它的软件包发布。但是，仅此一点不应阻止您使用它。希望随着它的不断成熟，它会获得一些关注。我个人将它用于我所有新的 OCaml 开发，无论是个人项目还是我的研究工作。
预计在 1.x 周期期间会出现相当大的变化。我们致力于使 API 向后兼容所有 1.x 版本，但将会添加新内容，并且可能会弃用旧模块/功能。尽管我们仍在寻找和修复错误，但其中大部分应该相当稳定。不过，通过让更多的人使用它并报告我们尚未看到的错误，这将有很大帮助。
我们希望 2.0 版本更加静态，并且模块之间具有更大程度的一致性，但 2.0 可能还有很长的路要走。
我的建议是：如果您要使用 Extlib，请使用电池。它吸收了 Extlib 的功能集（实际上是它的大部分代码），并对其进行了相当多的充实。如果您发现错误，请报告它们:)。
Semi-disclaimer: I am one of current developers of Batteries Included.
It hasn't seen a great deal of uptake yet so far as I know. I haven't seen any packages released that depend on it. However, that alone shouldn't stop you from using it. Hopefully it will gain some traction as it continues to mature. I personally use it for all of my new OCaml development, both for personal projects and for my research work.
Expect to see it in a fair amount of flux for the duration of the 1.x cycle. We're committed to keeping the APIs backwards-compatible for all 1.x releases, but new things will be added and old modules/functions likely deprecated. Much of it should be pretty stable, although we are still finding and fixing bugs. That will be greatly aided, though, by having more people use it and report the bugs we haven't seen yet.
We hope that the 2.0 release will be much more static and have a greater degree of consistency between modules, but 2.0 is likely a ways off.
My advice would be: if you would use Extlib, use Batteries. It has absorbed Extlib's feature set (indeed, most of its code), and fleshes it out quite a bit. If you find bugs, please report them :).
嗯，我个人推荐 OCaml 附带电池。当然，这只是碰巧我是原作者:)
该用途尚未广泛使用，但除了 GODI 之外，它现在已成为 Debian/testing 和 Ubuntu Lucid Lynx 的一部分，因此您可以期待很多人测试它是否有错误。
Well, I personally recommend OCaml Batteries Included. Of course, it just happens so that I'm the original author :)
The use is not widespread yet, but it's now part of Debian/testing and Ubuntu Lucid Lynx, in addition to GODI, so you can expect a number of people to test it for bugs.