From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <garrigue@math.nagoya-u.ac.jp>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE 
	autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3
X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr
Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr
Received: from discorde.inria.fr (discorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.38])
	by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1ED3EBC82
	for <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>; Wed, 22 Aug 2007 11:21:21 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from kurims.kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp (kurims.kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp [130.54.16.1])
	by discorde.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id l7M9LIgS016221
	for <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>; Wed, 22 Aug 2007 11:21:20 +0200
Received: from localhost (orion [130.54.16.5])
	by kurims.kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l7M9KxHF016992;
	Wed, 22 Aug 2007 18:20:59 +0900 (JST)
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 18:20:52 +0900 (JST)
Message-Id: <20070822.182052.63049707.garrigue@math.nagoya-u.ac.jp>
To: jon@ffconsultancy.com
Cc: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] If OCaml were a car
From: Jacques Garrigue <garrigue@math.nagoya-u.ac.jp>
In-Reply-To: <200708220913.39184.jon@ffconsultancy.com>
References: <20070819215924.6234b446.mle+ocaml@mega-nerd.com>
	<28fa90930708212250w15ce8fdai7fa615414d0279d@mail.gmail.com>
	<200708220913.39184.jon@ffconsultancy.com>
X-Mailer: Mew version 4.2 on Emacs 22.1 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Miltered: at discorde with ID 46CC000F.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail . ensmp . fr)!
X-Spam: no; 0.00; ocaml:01 ocaml:01 iter:01 iter:01 stdlabels:01 wrote:01 caml-list:01 garrigue:03 garrigue:03 jacques:03 jacques:03 vanilla:03 let:03 let:03 luca:04 

From: Jon Harrop <jon@ffconsultancy.com>
> On Wednesday 22 August 2007 06:50:24 Luca de Alfaro wrote:
> > The only thing about Ocaml I mind, is that it a bit like German is, in that
> > all the verbs at the end come.  And there nothing wrong is, but it for some
> > strange reading makes, and it strange is that this from France comes.
> >
> > I still somewhat puzzled am, at reading:
> >
> > let f x =
> >   [humonguous definition 50 lines spanning]
> > in List.iter f l
> >
> > because the only way I make sense of this can, is by first looking at where
> > f used is, and only then reading its definition.
> > I much rather write would:
> >
> > do List.iter f l
> > where f x = [humonguous definition]
> >
> > Maybe this problem with Ocamlp4 solvable is?
> 
> Get this to good effect in vanilla OCaml by copying F# you can:
> 
>   let ( |> ) x f = f x
> 
>   l |> List.iter
>     (fun e -> ...)

Or, sugar-free,

  open StdLabels

  List.iter l ~f:
  begin fun x ->
    ...
  end

Jacques Garrigue