Browse thread
[OSR] Standard syntax extensions ?
[
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: | Peng Zang <peng.zang@g...> |
| Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] [OSR] Standard syntax extensions ? |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Thursday 24 April 2008 01:05:44 pm Dario Teixeira wrote: > 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. > I was all about to advocate my favorite extensions until I read this. It makes a lot of sense. If build scripts can pull syntax extensions like libraries, and directly from the web, there is no reason to have a set of "standard extensions". Everyone can just use what they like, and distribute the source in that fashion. The makefile (or whatever build script) takes care of the rest. Peng -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFIEeNpfIRcEFL/JewRAvhxAJ99a9aZ/OJk5PkioMmN0SfbPF5qngCfcQnH r5IINNF4dq8NgF/11phIx3c= =xnyA -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----