Date: Fri, 03 Sep 1999 17:28:37 +1000
To: "Stefan Monnier" <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
From: John Skaller <email@example.com>
Subject: Re: convincing management to switch to Ocaml
At 15:03 31/08/99 -0400, Stefan Monnier wrote:
>Caml (like SML and Pascal and C and ...) has taken the point of view
>that begin/end entities should not be made mandatory if they are
>unambiguously unneeded. I can only agree with that point of view:
>why should I say
> if a then (1) else (2)
if a then q else 2 fi
>You could also try to rely on your programming environment to
I do. (But I'm using Vim :-)
>> (fun x -> print_endline ..)
>> is ugly compared to:
>> begin fun x -> print_endline .. end
>Aesthetics is in the eye of the beholder.
This is very true, and a fundamental problem for publishing.
Intent is important too: what works fine on my screen is not quite
the same as what looks good on paper.
>> but the ideal would be
>> fun x is print_endline .. efun
>Plop! Yet another reserved keyword!
.. which is not good, I agree.
>Syntax is one of those things that you just can't get right.
There is some truth in that, however, many would
claim that, for example, the syntax of C++ or Perl,
compared with say Python, is indeed superior.
John Skaller email: firstname.lastname@example.org
snail: 10/1 Toxteth Rd, Glebe NSW 2037, Australia
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jan 02 2000 - 11:58:25 MET