Re: [Caml-list] Ocaml syntax.

[Eric Merritt <cyberlync@yahoo.com>]

> 	Actually, for me, it's that I've been spending time
> learning the base 
> ocaml stuff and I get this strange feeling that
> camlp4 is an 
> unnecessary extra chunk of language I'd need to
> learn.  From what I've 
> been reading, it seems like I should probably get
> over that.  It's 
> certainly not because I favor inconsistencies.

 So far I have stayed away from the camlp4 revised
syntax, its just not as appealing to me. I tend to
think of the standard ocaml syntax as somewhat clean
and the p4 modifications as somewhat kludgey. Thats
just my opinion however.
 
> 	Like with most things, I'll probably eventually
> start playing with it 
> and wonder why I was so stupid to deny myself this
> great enhancement.
> 
 
 I havn't seen any compelling reason to switch. As
long as the core ocaml language isn't going to migrate
to it I don't see the point.

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/

-------------------
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