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 TAA26403; Wed, 10 Oct 2001 19:26:18 +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 TAA26267 for ; Wed, 10 Oct 2001 19:26:17 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr (dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr [130.79.44.193]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f9AHQG105725 for ; Wed, 10 Oct 2001 19:26:16 +0200 (MET DST) Received: (from luther@localhost) by dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr (8.9.3/8.9.3) id TAA06476; Wed, 10 Oct 2001 19:25:52 +0200 Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2001 19:25:51 +0200 From: Sven To: Patrick M Doane Cc: bcpierce@cis.upenn.edu, caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Re: [Caml-announce] OCamldoc Message-ID: <20011010192551.A6465@dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr> References: <4066.1002712085@saul.cis.upenn.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0.1i In-Reply-To: ; from patrick@watson.org on Wed, Oct 10, 2001 at 01:07:19PM -0400 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk On Wed, Oct 10, 2001 at 01:07:19PM -0400, Patrick M Doane wrote: > On Wed, 10 Oct 2001, Benjamin C. Pierce wrote: > > > I.e., *one* kind of (not very) funny comment marker, plus using the > > indentation to decide whether the comment binds to the expression before > > or after: > > > > if the comment is on a line by itself, > > then if its indentation is the same as the following (non-comment) line > > then it goes with the following > > else it goes with the preceding > > else it goes with the line it's on. > > This proposal looks perfect to me. > > I've also noticed in the manual that all of the multi-line comment > examples are like this: > > (** line 1 > line 2 > line 3 *) > > Will there be any issues with writing comments like this? > > (** line 1 > * line 2 > * line 3 > *) Yes, this is nice, and the extra * may even be provided by your editor automatically, like what happens with C code, provided the corresponding vim/emacs rules are extended accordyingly (but then maybe vim 6 can already do thi ?). 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