]> Hello, David. DB> The revised syntax to ocaml attempts to provide an cleaner, more DB> consistent syntax for the language, and it does a fairly good job of it. DB> However, I don't see very much code written in the revised syntax. I've DB> thought about why, and come up with an interesting theory. DB> The native ocaml syntax has a bunch of strange inconsistencies. Human DB> languages also tend to have lots of inconsistencies, especially around DB> the core words. Perhaps there is something about our brains that works DB> best when the core aspect of a language is inconsistent. Quite interesting, and maybe it is true, but I have more simple theory. First time I knew about revised syntax only when started to write camlp4-extensions, and at that time I've used caml about one year. No any note, nor even small remark about revised syntax was seen before reading camlp4 documentation. Larry said right about impatience, lazyness and hubris: most of us are too lazy to re-learn syntax of programming language after using it enough time. -- wbr, dmitry mailto:gds-mlsts@moldavcable.com ------------------- 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