On Monday 10 December 2007 22:13, Oliver Bandel wrote:
> Because I don't know how it's implemented, I don't know if this adds a
> performance lack. But possibly it would make sense to look at it closer
> to explore it's advantages and disadvantages...
> ...but I've no experience in OCaml extension, so I hope someone here can
> say some wprds about it.

OCaml has a great macro system called camlp4 that lets you add new syntactic 
constructs and rewrite OCaml code at will. So Martin's code adds a new 
syntactic construct and automatically injects the code for the compiler that 
we must currently write by hand. Consequently, its performance will be 
superb: as good as hand-written OCaml code.

However, using any camlp4 macros requires using the camlp4 replacement for the 
front-end of the compiler. That uses a different parsing technology (top-down 
recursive descent LL rather than bottom-up LALR) so the error messages from 
the compiler are completely different.

-- 
Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/?e