Re: Syntax for label, NEW PROPOSAL

From: Nicolas barnier (barnier@recherche.enac.fr)
Date: Thu Mar 23 2000 - 12:14:04 MET

  • Next message: John Max Skaller: "Re: Unsigned integers?"

    I'm quite tired with all this polemic. I agree
    with Pierre Weis: labels are a pain within HO
    args (acc:, i:) and fun:(fun ...) is ugly and
    verbose (and it contains its own sad smiley :).
    So I do not want (arbitrary) labels in my good
    old standard library, but I find them very useful
    in Labltk. Moreover, two compile modes are not
    a very good idea for obvious portability reasons.
    So I think we should switch to a single modern
    mode because labels in modern mode are useful
    and simple (at least in Labltk), and withdraw
    labels in the standard library because they're
    often a pain (and the lib is small enough to
    learn without the need for labels). We would
    then keep labels an orthogonal improvment.

    Cheers

    -- Nicolas

    P.S.: I saw in the lib that the *.mli are
    written with labels whereas the *.ml do not
    contain a single one. Can we conclude on which
    side stands Xavier ?



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Mar 23 2000 - 14:01:09 MET