English version
Accueil     À propos     Téléchargement     Ressources     Contactez-nous    

Ce site est rarement mis à jour. Pour les informations les plus récentes, rendez-vous sur le nouveau site OCaml à l'adresse ocaml.org.

Browse thread
[Caml-list] Re: Syntax Changes in OCaml
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: 2002-02-05 (12:01)
From: Daniel de Rauglaudre <daniel.de_rauglaudre@i...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Re: Syntax Changes in OCaml

On Tue, Feb 05, 2002 at 12:23:35PM +0100, Markus Mottl wrote:

> However, a shift to revised (or another) syntax as default wouldn't be
> all this bad: the preprocessor would still handle "normal" syntax, which
> means that you'd only have to feed your existing sources through the
> preprocessor. This can be done by changing only one line in your Makefile.

There is another point preventing us to change the syntax: there is no
consensus here about how the syntax must be. I made my choices with
the revised syntax, but somebody says that "this construction is ugly",
somebody else says that "that one (another one) is weird", and so on...
No convergence. And people ends with "pfff... this is *only* syntax".

If the architects don't agree of how the house must be, there is no
chance that the house be built. Therefore there is no plan to propose
or impose (like you would like) a new syntax.

But there is no problem of syntax: if you consider syntax as important,
and don't want to have problems with it, you can use the revised syntax.
If you consider that object programming is very important, use objects.
If you can't live without labels, use labels.

I don't want that people imposes me to use objects and labels, and I
shall not impose people to use the revised syntax.

The language is powerful, it is the reason why we can propose many
features and more and more. Yes it is a problem: it is like the
different window managers under X window, against the standard of
MsWindows of Apple. What is the better way? I don't know.

Here we have tried to improve the system, and this is therefore
something "like X windows", with the drawback that there are several
window-or-syntax managers.

Question: what is the better window manager under X window?

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