From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Original-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr Received: from mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.82]) by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 77C017EE1B for ; Fri, 30 Nov 2012 11:06:14 +0100 (CET) Received-SPF: None (mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of zack@upsilon.cc) identity=pra; client-ip=91.121.245.170; receiver=mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="zack@upsilon.cc"; x-sender="zack@upsilon.cc"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: None (mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of zack@upsilon.cc) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=91.121.245.170; receiver=mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="zack@upsilon.cc"; x-sender="zack@upsilon.cc"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: None (mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of postmaster@upsilon.hackadomia.org) identity=helo; client-ip=91.121.245.170; receiver=mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="zack@upsilon.cc"; x-sender="postmaster@upsilon.hackadomia.org"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Ag0FALOEuFBbefWq/2dsb2JhbABEg2S8KRZzgh4BAQQBJwsBNRYLCxguFBhEiAoKA79QjECBGoJGYQOVf4EdiC6BbYUNgnM X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,191,1355094000"; d="scan'208";a="183944559" Received: from upsilon.hackadomia.org ([91.121.245.170]) by mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 30 Nov 2012 11:06:03 +0100 Received: from usha.takhisis.invalid (roam-nat-sw-prg-gm-194-254-61-1.net.univ-paris-diderot.fr [194.254.61.1]) by upsilon.hackadomia.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 51B1F100E8 for ; Fri, 30 Nov 2012 11:06:03 +0100 (CET) Received: by usha.takhisis.invalid (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 9308D6808E7; Fri, 30 Nov 2012 11:06:01 +0100 (CET) Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2012 11:06:01 +0100 From: Stefano Zacchiroli To: caml-list@inria.fr Message-ID: <20121130100601.GA27413@upsilon.cc> References: <50B822A6.7000504@emu-bark.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Subject: Re: [Caml-list] List.fold_left vs. Hashtbl.fold On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 10:53:21AM +0100, Gabriel Scherer wrote: > My personal opinion is that currying is overrated Very much agreed! > and we should think about language design without currying, and with a > nice short syntax for partial application (inspired by Scala's > admittedly dubious (foo _ bar) syntax for (fun x -> foo x bar)). ... but I'm curious about this "dubious" point. Is it something that has already been discussed in the context of OCaml and I've missed the relevant discussion? Or is it something there are results available elsewhere? Either way, pointers on that would be very much appreciated! And thanks for your efforts in fueling language design discussion on this list!, I really appreciate it and the resulting discussions. Cheers. -- Stefano Zacchiroli . . . . . . . zack@upsilon.cc . . . . o . . . o . o Maître de conférences . . . . . http://upsilon.cc/zack . . . o . . . o o Debian Project Leader . . . . . . @zack on identi.ca . . o o o . . . o . « the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club »