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 PAA05994; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 15:34:10 +0200 (MET DST) Received: (from weis@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id PAA06072 for caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 15:34:10 +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 IAA30694 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 08:11:38 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from swordfish.cs.caltech.edu (swordfish.cs.caltech.edu [131.215.44.124]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id g776Bb528062 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 08:11:37 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from orchestra.cs.caltech.edu (orchestra.cs.caltech.edu [131.215.44.20]) by swordfish.cs.caltech.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EF35DF26D; Tue, 6 Aug 2002 23:11:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from mvanier@localhost) by orchestra.cs.caltech.edu (8.11.6/8.9.3) id g776BaG02942; Tue, 6 Aug 2002 23:11:36 -0700 Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2002 23:11:36 -0700 Message-Id: <200208070611.g776BaG02942@orchestra.cs.caltech.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: orchestra.cs.caltech.edu: mvanier set sender to mvanier@cs.caltech.edu using -f From: Michael Vanier To: avv@quasar.ipa.nw.ru Cc: garrigue@kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp, caml-list@inria.fr In-reply-to: <3D50AF3E.8965A1DE@quasar.ipa.nw.ru> (avv@quasar.ipa.nw.ru) Subject: Re: [Caml-list] ocaml-mode-3.05 References: <20020805154908L.garrigue@kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp> <200208061837.48621.jeffrey.palmer@acm.org> <20020807091842P.garrigue@kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp> <3D50AF3E.8965A1DE@quasar.ipa.nw.ru> Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk > Date: Tue, 06 Aug 2002 22:25:18 -0700 > From: "Alexander V. Voinov" > > Hi All, > > Jacques Garrigue wrote: > > > > From: Jeffrey Palmer > > > > > Can anyone give a quick comparison of the Tuareg ocaml mode and > > > ocaml-mode-3.05? Is the indentation better/standardized in one > > > vs. the other, support for font-locking, etc. > > > > I'm not a Tuareg mode user myself (not surprising) > > I'm not in a position to argue on either of these modes, but I use > tuareg and it satisfies all my needs. I only remember that I switched to > it from some other mode which was less satisfactory. > Although the standard ocaml mode is fine for me when it works, there's one thing about it that really annoys me: occasionally the indenting engine gets confused and then totally refuses to do the right thing from then on. I have to manually re-load the caml-mode emacs files to fix it. Another thing I don't like is that caml-mode doesn't treat nested comments correctly as far as syntax coloring is concerned. I guess I should give tuareg a try. Mike ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners