Martin Jambon wrote:

> On Mon, 18 Jul 2005, Robert Roessler wrote:
> 
> 
>>I just noticed this when my OCaml syntax-colorer failed to render lnot
>>as a keyword... :)
>>
>>So I checked the manual section (6.1 "Lexical conventions", subsection
>>"Keywords") that served as the reference for said syntax-colorer and
>>noticed that lnot is not there.
>>
>>Since the other "bitwise" logical operators are listed as keywords, I
>>assume this is an oversight?
> 
> 
> I guess these were made keywords keywords so that they can become
> infix operators. lnot doesn't have this problem since it takes only
> one argument.

Thanks, Martin - that sounds plausible, and I wondered if there was
some arcane reason for the "missing" lnot... this probably also
explains why lnot does not appear in lexer.mll - I had missed this
file on my first pass through the sources. :)

Robert Roessler
roessler@rftp.com
http://www.rftp.com