From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.105]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5137EBBCD for ; Fri, 25 Apr 2008 15:58:08 +0200 (CEST) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvwHAAuAEUhA6bL1c2dsb2JhbACRWgEMAwQECQ8FlS2FGg X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.25,707,1199660400"; d="scan'208";a="25492099" Received: from hs-out-0708.google.com ([64.233.178.245]) by mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 25 Apr 2008 15:58:07 +0200 Received: by hs-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id m63so2936703hsc.11 for ; Fri, 25 Apr 2008 06:58:06 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:from:reply-to:to:subject:date:user-agent:cc:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:message-id; bh=skYtsaE92lQV7eJF+4Nt0yGGPpd6HdPLbY7ck79XrPM=; b=PHQeENMjF8aAKMtR1SQ8iP1Zht8S/HcExFh91ALQh49bYlh5Q5ZyAp8u7oNB6d3mN5DXimfMlB8N4GNQkPvEdzCXna4Wr2msPvuFSlmTo9nZFMVQL4ohv6MpC/ia6hGusMFUSEnZK8pzRo4yJAQF0kdv71d6cXb67kl3NPr9qdo= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=from:reply-to:to:subject:date:user-agent:cc:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:message-id; b=qB+3rzZ5eaaJvbv/jwVwazRH55P1ljykVs+h/PTiqZAp0O1wgUXROW7Tb58bzaFa/3JIyriPOCQ5FQCAmn+mHDqrsAefmAxdFPXNt7/lK5HtCuH7h4sR/CaWZs7JLaL/b8cvu/vULOlAZplSi+yp5GEjVVfbEhL4hd/NsuBcgFc= Received: by 10.90.114.19 with SMTP id m19mr5678593agc.91.1209131886509; Fri, 25 Apr 2008 06:58:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lawn-143-215-204-204.lawn.gatech.edu ( [143.215.204.204]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id z26sm2908282ele.15.2008.04.25.06.58.02 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Fri, 25 Apr 2008 06:58:03 -0700 (PDT) From: Peng Zang Reply-To: peng.zang@gmail.com To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] [OSR] Standard syntax extensions ? Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2008 09:57:59 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.7 Cc: Dario Teixeira , David Teller References: <713538.14736.qm@web54607.mail.re2.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <713538.14736.qm@web54607.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200804250958.01989.peng.zang@gmail.com> X-Spam: no; 0.00; syntax:01 hash:01 findlib:01 camlp:01 syntax:01 makefile:01 peng:98 peng:98 wrote:01 naming:01 caml-list:01 conventions:02 gnu:03 message-----:05 pgp:05 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Thursday 24 April 2008 01:05:44 pm Dario Teixeira wrote: > Remember the recent thread about ocamlbuild+findlib+camlp4 and the OSR > about standardising naming conventions for syntax extensions [1]. Using > a special ocamlbuild plugin [2], the barrier to using syntax extensions > is so low that you can almost consider them as standard language features. > I was all about to advocate my favorite extensions until I read this. It makes a lot of sense. If build scripts can pull syntax extensions like libraries, and directly from the web, there is no reason to have a set of "standard extensions". Everyone can just use what they like, and distribute the source in that fashion. The makefile (or whatever build script) takes care of the rest. Peng -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFIEeNpfIRcEFL/JewRAvhxAJ99a9aZ/OJk5PkioMmN0SfbPF5qngCfcQnH r5IINNF4dq8NgF/11phIx3c= =xnyA -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----