From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id EAA23641; Sun, 10 Jun 2001 04:25:34 +0200 (MET DST) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id EAA23728 for ; Sun, 10 Jun 2001 04:25:33 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from tisch.mail.mindspring.net (tisch.mail.mindspring.net [207.69.200.157]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f5A2PWn19183 for ; Sun, 10 Jun 2001 04:25:32 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from dylan (1Cust201.tnt3.tucson.az.da.uu.net [63.11.144.201]) by tisch.mail.mindspring.net (8.9.3/8.8.5) with SMTP id WAA24680 for ; Sat, 9 Jun 2001 22:25:30 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <001401c0f154$ef935150$210148bf@dylan> From: "David McClain" To: References: <001501c0f139$9ce86640$210148bf@dylan> <5.1.0.14.0.20010609175833.03bdda20@chasm.org> Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Evaluation Order Date: Sat, 9 Jun 2001 19:27:44 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk > The specification that indicates temporal preference is > > let in let in ... > > Argument evaluation order and temporal preference are two orthogonal concepts and should not be conflated. I support unspecified argument evaluation order. I agree with you, but you have proposed effectively doing nothing. There is no safeguard to prevent someone bypassing this syntax by accident. - DM ------------------- Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr