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 TAA15687; Tue, 5 Feb 2002 19:45:59 +0100 (MET) 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 TAA14220 for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2002 19:45:58 +0100 (MET) Received: from gogol.zorgol (Mix-Montsouris-109-1-242.abo.wanadoo.fr [193.248.100.242]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id g15Iju921439 for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2002 19:45:56 +0100 (MET) Received: (qmail 23567 invoked by uid 1001); 5 Feb 2002 18:32:58 -0000 Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2002 19:32:58 +0100 From: Berke Durak To: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: [Caml-list] The solution to the syntax war Message-ID: <20020205193258.C32589@gogol.zorgol> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk I think the Caml team should impose a new syntax with the next big change in Ocaml. Further, that new syntax should have been really well thought. Plus if it's dissimilar both to the standard and revised syntaxes, there will be no major opposition. And invoking a preprocessor significantly slows my compilation process. Not that I'm against, but it should be built-in. So : 1) You can't change syntax just for the sake of changing syntax. 2) Find a new, useful feature with appealing buzzname (new Ocaml 4.00 with automatic sigma-homomorphisms) -- sell it. Oh, by the way, it uses a new syntax (But there's a very smart Ocaml 3.0x -> Ocaml 4.00 converter bundled). 3) Merge camlp4 into the compiler. No syntax changes until that. -- Berke Durak ------------------- 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