From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.83]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D656BC6B for ; Tue, 18 Sep 2007 22:40:25 +0200 (CEST) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgAAAIHU70bLENaMn2dsb2JhbACOEAICBwIIBwgY X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.20,270,1186351200"; d="scan'208";a="1376649" Received: from ipmail01.adl2.internode.on.net ([203.16.214.140]) by mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 18 Sep 2007 22:41:32 +0200 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgAAAN/T70Z5LHvc/2dsb2JhbAAM X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.20,270,1186324200"; d="scan'208";a="193608419" Received: from ppp121-44-123-220.lns10.syd6.internode.on.net (HELO [192.168.1.201]) ([121.44.123.220]) by ipmail01.adl2.internode.on.net with ESMTP; 19 Sep 2007 06:11:29 +0930 Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Having '<<', why to use '|>' ? From: skaller To: Jon Harrop Cc: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr In-Reply-To: <200709181742.27747.jon@ffconsultancy.com> References: <20070917163617.0e6e0e7c@localhost.localdomain> <20070918085310.GB12115@localhost> <20070918161246.1ff37e29@localhost.localdomain> <200709181742.27747.jon@ffconsultancy.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2007 06:41:28 +1000 Message-Id: <1190148088.6459.75.camel@rosella.wigram> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.10.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam: no; 0.00; 0100,:01 ocaml:01 infix:01 unreadable:01 'o':01 'small:98 sourceforge:01 lexical:01 wrote:01 caml-list:01 fonts:03 character:04 problem:05 problem:05 tue:06 On Tue, 2007-09-18 at 17:42 +0100, Jon Harrop wrote: > If an OCaml front-end handled unicode with appropriate symbol settings then > you could use an "o" symbol to mean that infix operator. I think that is a > good solution, provided you use an editor that supports suitable unicode and > there is an easy way to enter such things. Actually no, I tried this. I used gvim and ignored the difficulty of entering the Unicode characters I wanted. The problem I found was that the fonts were such that the character was almost unreadable. And I think i tried, for example, the high school division sign.. If you tried that with a 'small o' it would just look like a small 'o' and not the composition operator. I think this problem might be fixed with lexical coloring though! -- John Skaller Felix, successor to C++: http://felix.sf.net