Browse thread
[Caml-list] Different types of streams
[
Home
]
[ Index:
by date
|
by threads
]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: | 2001-09-05 (08:02) |
From: | STARYNKEVITCH Basile <Basile.Starynkevitch@c...> |
Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] Different types of streams |
>>>>> "Daniel" == Daniel de Rauglaudre <daniel.de_rauglaudre@inria.fr> writes: Daniel> On Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 03:03:35AM +0200, Daniel> Christian RINDERKNECHT wrote: [...] >> As an aside: the performance of my parser was not a concern, >> feasability was the main challenge. I nevertheless understand >> it can be an important issue. I understood there was a plan to >> remove the [< >] from OCaml, and to request users using camlp4, >> is it correct? Daniel> Yes. Is it a problem? Perhaps. standard Ocaml input is done (with the exception of low level input such as Pervasives.read_line etc....) with the "19.10 Module Genlex: a generic lexical analyzer" whose documentation mentions explicitly the [< >] construct. Several ocaml programs would like to do input without a specific lexer or a parser. This is done thu Genlex which need the [< >] construct. I suggest maintaining the [< >] for a while -ie for several years- (perhaps marking it explicitly as deprecated in the documentation). It should be probably acceptable to have the [< >] construct handled by a standard campl4 module, especially if/when camlp4 will be merged into the main ocaml package. Should the Genlex module be deprecated, a newer way of making high level input should be proposed. My opinion is that it should *not* be modelled on C's infamous scanf. Formatted input should particularily well be explained, since it is a function needed by all newcomers. The first program you write is a hello world, and the second one asks for your name and age and tells you hello :-) Best regards to all **resumé en français: les flots par [< >] sont indispensables au module Genlex. Ils ne devraient donc pas être violemment supprimés (avant plusieurs années). Si Genlex disparaissait, il faudrait un autre procédé de lecture de haut niveau (autre que Pervasives.read_line et consors). A mon avis il ne faut surtout pas s' inspirer de l' infâme scanf du C. Les entrées formattées doivent être bien documentées car elles sont indispensables au débutant. Cordialement N.B. Any opinions expressed here are only mine, and not of my organization. N.B. Les opinions exprimees ici me sont personnelles et n engagent pas le CEA. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Basile STARYNKEVITCH ---- Commissariat à l Energie Atomique * France DRT/LIST/DTSI/SLA * CEA/Saclay b.528 (p111f) * 91191 GIF/YVETTE CEDEX work email: Basile point Starynkevitch at cea point fr home email: Basile point Starynkevitch at wanadoo point fr ------------------- Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr