I just want to point out that this is question is not the reverse of
Best approach for designing F# libraries for use from both F# and C#
Here I\'m not asking ho
Imagine one day you would like to rewrite your C# library in F# for better usability. Here are the paths you are likely to take:
I focus on the path "Imperative C# --> Functional C# --> Functional F# --> Idiomatic F#". The more functional your C# library is, the more usable your library is in F#. Functional style helps increase composability and is closer to idiomatic F# code. Along these lines, you can:
readonly
first.The picture above is taken from F# for fun and profit's Porting from C# to F# series. They are very helpful; knowing how C# concepts are expressed in F# will improve usability of your library.
It's hard to avoid C#'s object-oriented features. Remember that F# type inference doesn't work very well with these features. Along the line of keeping object hierarchy simple, you should reduce number of member overloads. A big number of member overloads will easily confuse F# type checker. Moreover, it doesn't hurt to distribute a thin F# wrapper with your C# library. Certain things you need to do are turning some methods into module functions and creatingActive Patterns to decompose object hierarchy.
Interop with existing .NET libraries was a major design goal of F#, so there aren't any constraints on the libraries to be consumed.
That said, because of F#'s stricter typing, there are some patterns that result in slightly clunkier code. The builder pattern is one.
var bldr = new StringBuilder();
bldr.Append("abc"); //ignoring return value
vs.
bldr.Append("abc") |> ignore //must be explicitly ignored
But this is easily worked around using an extension method or let-bound function. Bottom line: interop is one of F#'s strengths and greatest achievements.