When writing an example just now for this list, I noticed that you can
no longer (assuming you ever could) write (::) or any variation
thereof to refer to the definition of the :: cons operator.  Since
there is no other standard way to write this, one must use:

let cons x y = x :: y

to get one.  This is unfortunate when you wish to, say, define map in
terms of fold.  My suspicion is that it may have worked in the past,
but broken by keyword argument parsing.  Is there any chance (::)
could be special cased to work correctly, even though it conflicts
with (x : y) for typing?  I don't think it likely that anybody would
write (::) intending to express a type.

John.
-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners