]> On Sat, 2003-10-04 at 21:29, Alain.Frisch@ens.fr wrote: > On 4 Oct 2003, skaller wrote: > > > Just some notes on camlp4. One problem I have noticed > > is that camlp4'd codes don't work so well with other > > tools such as ocamldep and ocamldoc. Both these programs > > parse Ocaml but can't load camlp4 to do the job. > > [I think you have to use pr_o.cmo to print a standard > > Ocaml file to use them?] > > Both ocamldep and ocamldoc accept the -pp argument. It isn't not documented? > Sometimes, it would be > more convenient to specify the syntax extensions directly in the Caml > sources. Yes, i think that would be nice. There's a related issue for C++ where some discussion of a directive: #language "iso-9988" or whatever so extensions in the next version don't break existing codes (mainly by some identifiers becoming keywords). ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners