From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83CD7BB81 for ; Wed, 28 Sep 2005 18:37:55 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pauillac.inria.fr (pauillac.inria.fr [128.93.11.35]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id j8SGbsRH022865 for ; Wed, 28 Sep 2005 18:37:54 +0200 Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id SAA20396 for ; Wed, 28 Sep 2005 18:37:53 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from smtp3.adl2.internode.on.net (smtp3.adl2.internode.on.net [203.16.214.203]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id j8SGbp0Q002965 for ; Wed, 28 Sep 2005 18:37:52 +0200 Received: from rosella (ppp16-174.lns2.syd7.internode.on.net [59.167.16.174]) by smtp3.adl2.internode.on.net (8.12.9/8.12.6) with ESMTP id j8SGbiUe062559; Thu, 29 Sep 2005 02:07:45 +0930 (CST) (envelope-from skaller@users.sourceforge.net) Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Looking for a configuration file library From: skaller To: brogoff Cc: David MENTRE , caml-list In-Reply-To: References: <3d13dcfc05092706091acdb72a@mail.gmail.com> <3d13dcfc050928000613f42ed@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 02:37:44 +1000 Message-Id: <1127925464.7743.71.camel@rosella> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.1.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 433AC6E2.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Miltered: at nez-perce with ID 433AC6DF.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 noweb:01 literate:01 ocamldoc:01 noweb:01 wrote:01 sourceforge:01 library:03 long:04 problem:05 problem:05 style:93 wed:07 john:08 2005:91 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.3 (2005-04-27) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled version=3.0.3 On Wed, 2005-09-28 at 08:15 -0700, brogoff wrote: > > [1] Even if, in the long term, I want to remove noweb in order to use > > a literate programing style relying on language source code, like > > ocamldoc. > > That is exactly what I wish they had done. Why? Is there problem with running noweb to extract the source? Or is there a problem editing noweb files? -- John Skaller Felix, successor to C++: http://felix.sf.net