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] syntax foo
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: 2002-02-06 (11:56)
From: Jérôme Marant <jerome.marant@f...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] syntax foo
On Tue, Feb 05, 2002 at 12:48:06PM -0800, james woodyatt wrote:

Hi James,

> 	+ With the inclusion of camlp4 in the distribution, I don't have to 
> care about the syntax of the language.  There's a parser and a printer 
> to handle any conversions I may ever need to make.  If there isn't, I 
> can write one.  In the end, the syntax is irrelevant; it's the semantics 
> I care about.  I am not here to complain about syntax.
> Here's why I don't want to see the Ocaml team make any changes to the 
> syntax: I'm certain they have more important things they could be 
> doing.  Like, for example, support for dynamic loading of native code on 
> Mac OS X.

  I agree with all what you said. The current syntax is the one that was
  adopted in the very beginning of Caml. Its syntax is the one which
  make Caml different from other languages and it has been adopted by
  people all over the years. Changing it would make the 'OCaml touch'
  go away.
  People who want a Haskell-like syntax will have to go for Haskell or
  use camlp4 which seem to do the job pretty well regarding what people
  say about it.

  So, please stop pestering OCaml authors with syntactic considerations,
  I have no doubt that there are higher priority improvements.
  (it's up to them to decide or not on this though).


Jérôme Marant <jerome@marant.org>

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