From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.105]) by walapai.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id q05Le27J005579 for ; Thu, 5 Jan 2012 22:40:02 +0100 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AhwFAAgYBk9QRFuw/2dsb2JhbABCggWqeoEFgXIBAQU6PxALGBwSFCghiA+2KoUVhhljBJUFkjY X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.71,464,1320620400"; d="scan'208";a="125760582" Received: from furbychan.cocan.org ([80.68.91.176]) by mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/AES256-SHA; 05 Jan 2012 22:39:57 +0100 Received: from rich by furbychan.cocan.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Riv2T-00085O-1g; Thu, 05 Jan 2012 21:39:57 +0000 Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2012 21:39:57 +0000 From: "Richard W.M. Jones" To: Gabriel Scherer Cc: ivan chollet , Lukasz Stafiniak , Diego Olivier Fernandez Pons , caml-list Message-ID: <20120105213957.GB30972@annexia.org> References: <20120105200442.GA17669@annexia.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Examples where let rec is undesirable On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 09:46:32PM +0100, Gabriel Scherer wrote: > Bindings, they argue, should not be nested, and you > should never have more than two, three layers of scope in your code. I often think the problem here is not with the code, nor the programmers, but with the tools. Editors should make it easier to fold scopes away and annotate the folded-away scopes with comments, when you don't want to directly look at the code. Rich. -- Richard Jones Red Hat