I am relying on a syntax for records which relies on adding six 
extensions to the grammar for every new record type.  Is this bad?  For 
now my program has only about 10 record types, but I'm worried that if 
some point I start loading down the parser, I'll have to go rewrite my 
macros to use a little different syntax and their own namespaces for the 
record information.  (And of course muck through my source code which 
uses them.)  Is this a useful concern?  Would it be good practice to 
change it anyway?


Jeff Henrikson

-------------------
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