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 4E3CED45F for ; Tue, 1 Nov 2005 16:43:54 +0100 (CET) Received: from mailx.valdosta.edu (VO44360.valdosta.edu [168.18.130.251]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id jA1Fhqw8026583 for ; Tue, 1 Nov 2005 16:43:53 +0100 Received: from blazemail.valdosta.edu (blazemail.valdosta.edu [168.18.130.208]) by mailx.valdosta.edu (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id jA1FhpoO029102 for ; Tue, 1 Nov 2005 10:43:51 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from jtbryant@valdosta.edu) Received: from starlight.valdosta.edu (VO00985.valdosta.edu [168.18.148.146]) by blazemail.valdosta.edu (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.04 (built Feb 8 2005)) with ESMTP id <0IPA00LGO913AL@blazemail.valdosta.edu> for caml-list@yquem.inria.fr; Tue, 01 Nov 2005 10:43:51 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2005 10:45:56 -0500 From: Jonathan Bryant Subject: Re: lablgl (was Re: [Caml-list] Stdlib) In-reply-to: To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Reply-To: jtbryant@valdosta.edu Message-id: <1130859956.31646.37.camel@starlight> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.5 (1.4.5-17) Content-type: text/plain; charset= Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT References: <1130803637.488.28.camel@starlight> X-PMX-Version: 5.0.2.153301, Antispam-Engine: 2.0.3.2, Antispam-Data: 2005.11.1.13 X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 43678D38.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; lablgl:01 caml-list:01 stdlib:01 ocaml:01 lablgl:01 ocaml:01 intern:01 ...:98 ohne:98 einfach:98 ein:98 ein:98 exile:98 wrote:01 unix:01 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 Tue, 2005-11-01 at 10:30, Daniel Bünzli wrote: > Le 1 nov. 05 à 01:07, Jonathan Bryant a écrit : > > > On another note, I would love to do this other project in OCaml, > > but it > > is OpenGL intensive (read: based) and LablGL drives me nuts. The > > named > > argument thing drives me up the wall because it's more information > > that > > I don't want to have to learn and internalize. Ok, wow. Didn't mean to make people mad. It was more a rant that was not meant for comment and was /definitely not a bash on LablGL/. I was just trying to say that I, in general and as a personal preference, don't like labels. It's not just an OCaml thing. I don't use it in any language that offers it. I apologize if I was unclear. I understand the value but I just find them (incredibly) annoying. Again, personal preference. I was /only/ using LablGL as an example of labled arguments because it was a /relevenat/ libray that uses labels. Sorry... -- --Jonathan Bryant jtbryant@valdosta.edu Student Intern Unix System Operations VSU Information Technology "Das Leben ohne Music ist einfach ein Irrtum, eine Strapaze, ein" Exil." ("Life without music is simply an error, a pain, an exile.") --Frederich Nietzsche "The three cardinal values of a programmer are laziness, impatience, and hubris." --Perl Man Page