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 UAA30431; Tue, 3 Apr 2001 20:16:39 +0200 (MET DST) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: (from weis@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id UAA30475 for caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr; Tue, 3 Apr 2001 20:16:38 +0200 (MET DST) 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 SAA27967 for ; Tue, 3 Apr 2001 18:40:17 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from ganymede.or.intel.com (jffdns01.or.intel.com [134.134.248.3]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f33GeEf19197 for ; Tue, 3 Apr 2001 18:40:14 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from ichips-ra.pdx.intel.com (ichips-ra.intel.com [10.7.3.35]) by ganymede.or.intel.com (8.9.1a+p1/8.9.1/d: relay.m4,v 1.35 2001/02/12 09:03:45 smothers Exp $) with ESMTP id QAA18685 for ; Tue, 3 Apr 2001 16:39:58 GMT Received: from dhpc0010.pdx.intel.com (dhpc0010.pdx.intel.com [10.7.21.33]) by ichips-ra.pdx.intel.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1/d: internal.m4,v 1.2 1998/11/09 19:18:37 iwep Exp iwep $) with ESMTP id JAA02005; Tue, 3 Apr 2001 09:39:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ichips.intel.com (johnh@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dhpc0010.pdx.intel.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1/d: client-ra.m4,v 1.1 1998/12/24 19:00:55 jamesw Exp jamesw $) with ESMTP id JAA17657; Tue, 3 Apr 2001 09:39:57 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200104031639.JAA17657@dhpc0010.pdx.intel.com> To: caml-list@inria.fr cc: John Harrison Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Future of labels, and ideas for library labelling Date: Tue, 03 Apr 2001 09:39:46 -0700 From: John R Harrison Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk Like Jean-Christophe Filliatre and Josh Guttman, I'm one of the "silent majority" who are happy with conventional CAML syntax and have no inclination to use labels. I can well imagine that labels might provide valuable documentation in certain situations, but I put more value on the directness and mathematical elegance of the traditional functional style. I'm all in favour of OCaml being an exciting vehicle for new programming language research. This may be partly responsible for its present vitality. But it's important to remember that some of us were attracted to CAML by its conceptual simplicity and its efficient and economical implementation, rather than by any exotic experimental features. So I fully support Xavier's policy of keeping extensions like labels out of the "core" language. Cheers, John. ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr. Archives: http://caml.inria.fr