Browse thread
[Caml-list] Strange syntax behavior
[
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: | -- (:) |
| From: | skaller <skaller@u...> |
| Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] Strange syntax behavior |
On Wed, 2004-06-02 at 03:13, John Goerzen wrote: > Is this a bug or a feature? If a feature, why is this so? the > try..with behavior seems highly misleading. This is a consequence of a lot of the syntactic elements being prefix form, that is, having no trailing terminator: if/then/else and try/with and let/in and match/with are all like this, whilst while/do/done and for/do/done are terminated. Prefix forms have to have a definite precedence. No choice is always what you want. Felix uses closed constructions mainly so you have to write: if/then/else/endif and match .. endmatch etc. [Except i had to allow let/in .. :] Whilst this is more obvious than the Ocaml syntax, it does make heavily nested expressions more verbose. Summary: a fairly arbitrary choice. Use begin/end around try/with if in doubt. You will get used to it. However it is a bit of an obstacle to learning Ocaml: after, what, 8 years Ocaml programming I still have no idea what the precedences of everything are. And I have no idea how to read C type declarations after 20+ years .. I just use typedefs .. it was interesting to write a parser/emitter for them recently, I actually almost learned the C rules.. -- John Skaller, mailto:skaller@users.sf.net voice: 061-2-9660-0850, snail: PO BOX 401 Glebe NSW 2037 Australia Checkout the Felix programming language http://felix.sf.net ------------------- 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