Hi,

Thanks for your initiative, David!

> * which syntax extensions do you use so often that you consider they
> should be part of the language ?

Though there are a few so useful (open_in, list comprehensions) they
can almost be considered "standard", I still don't think their inclusion
by default is of paramount importance.  The reason?  As long as they
are properly packaged and widely available (namely in the "big three":
GODI, Debian, and Fedora), it makes little difference if they are included
by default or not.  After all, they're just a godi_console/apt-get/yum
away.

Remember the recent thread about ocamlbuild+findlib+camlp4 and the OSR
about standardising naming conventions for syntax extensions [1].  Using
a special ocamlbuild plugin [2], the barrier to using syntax extensions
is so low that you can almost consider them as standard language features.

(In theory, anyway.  For the above-described nirvana to become reality,
P4ck needs to be integrated into GODI.  Have you considered it, Martin?).

Cheers,
Dario Teixeira


[1]:
http://www.cocan.org/osr/meta_files_for_packages_containing_syntax_extensions
[2]: http://brion.inria.fr/gallium/index.php/Using_ocamlfind_with_ocamlbuild



      __________________________________________________________
Sent from Yahoo! Mail.
A Smarter Email http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html