OCaml explicit type signatures

35
votes

In Haskell, it is considered good practice to explicitly declare the type signature of your functions, even though it can (usually) be inferred. It seems like this isn't even possible in OCaml, e.g. 

val add : int -> int -> int ;;

gives me an error. (Although I can make type modules which give only signatures.)

  1. Am I correct in that this isn't possible to do in OCaml?
  2. If so, why? The type system of OCaml doesn't seem that incredibly different from Haskell.
2
syntaxtypesocamltype-inference

2 Answers

55
votes

OCaml has two ways of specifying types, they can be done inline:

let intEq (x : int) (y : int) : bool = ...

or they can be placed in an interface file, as you have done:

val intEq : int -> int -> bool

I believe the latter is preferred, since it more cleanly separates the specification (type) from the implementation (code).

References: OCaml for Haskellers

20
votes

Im general, the syntax to let-bind a value with a constrained type is:

let val : constraint = e ...

Applied to a function, you can specify the signature as follows:

let add : int -> int -> int = fun x y -> ...

This is analogous to the syntax required to constrain a module to a signature:

module Mod
  : sig    ... end
  = struct ... end