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 WAA21641; Sun, 24 Jun 2001 22:56:24 +0200 (MET DST) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f 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 WAA21688 for ; Sun, 24 Jun 2001 22:56:23 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr (dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr [130.79.6.1]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f5OKuMn18818 for ; Sun, 24 Jun 2001 22:56:22 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from lambda.u-strasbg.fr (mail@lambda.u-strasbg.fr [130.79.90.63]) by dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA30122; Sun, 24 Jun 2001 22:54:46 +0200 Received: from luther by lambda.u-strasbg.fr with local (Exim 3.22 #1 (Debian)) id 15EGyp-0007YK-00; Sun, 24 Jun 2001 22:59:39 +0200 Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2001 22:59:39 +0200 To: Brian Rogoff Cc: Sven LUTHER , John Max Skaller , caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Caml toplevel and readline Message-ID: <20010624225939.A29031@lambda.u-strasbg.fr> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.18i From: Sven LUTHER Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk On Fri, Jun 22, 2001 at 08:36:39AM -0700, Brian Rogoff wrote: > On Fri, 22 Jun 2001, Sven LUTHER wrote: > > In the end the ledit option seems the more attractive, being written in ocaml > > and all. I would love to have it included in the base ocaml tarball. > > I agree, but that would also mean having CamlP4 in the base ocaml tarball. > That isn't a complaint, I'd be perfectly happy with CamlP4 in there. Keeping > the size of that tarball down ceased being an issue with me since 2.99/3.0 > or thereabouts, when the gzipped tarball became slightly bigger than a > double density floppy. And besides, I like P4 and Revised. but it could be kind of preprocessed before distributing the tarball, isn't it ? I am not that familiar with camlp4 though to know if thisis possible. Friendly, Sven Luther ------------------- 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