From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <rich@annexia.org>
X-Original-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr
Delivered-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr
Received: from mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.83])
	by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2A9987EE51
	for <caml-list@sympa.inria.fr>; Tue, 21 May 2013 16:22:18 +0200 (CEST)
Received-SPF: None (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  rich@annexia.org) identity=pra; client-ip=80.68.91.176;
  receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="rich@annexia.org";
  x-sender="rich@annexia.org"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible
Received-SPF: Pass (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: domain of
  rich@annexia.org designates 80.68.91.176 as permitted sender)
  identity=mailfrom; client-ip=80.68.91.176;
  receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="rich@annexia.org";
  x-sender="rich@annexia.org"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible;
  x-record-type="v=spf1"
Received-SPF: None (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  postmaster@furbychan.cocan.org) identity=helo;
  client-ip=80.68.91.176;
  receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="rich@annexia.org";
  x-sender="postmaster@furbychan.cocan.org";
  x-conformance=sidf_compatible
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Ar4JAIKCm1FQRFuw/2dsb2JhbABZgwiCAYEkvlUEAYEIFnSCIwEBBTIBRhALGAkTEg8FKCGIJLtVhhyHZ4EXB4JzYQOXN5FBgxA7
X-IPAS-Result: Ar4JAIKCm1FQRFuw/2dsb2JhbABZgwiCAYEkvlUEAYEIFnSCIwEBBTIBRhALGAkTEg8FKCGIJLtVhhyHZ4EXB4JzYQOXN5FBgxA7
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.87,714,1363129200"; 
   d="scan'208";a="18340201"
Received: from furbychan.cocan.org ([80.68.91.176])
  by mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/AES256-SHA; 21 May 2013 16:22:15 +0200
Received: from rich by furbychan.cocan.org with local (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <rich@annexia.org>)
	id 1UenS5-0002wU-W6; Tue, 21 May 2013 15:22:09 +0100
Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 15:22:09 +0100
From: "Richard W.M. Jones" <rich@annexia.org>
To: Dario Teixeira <darioteixeira@yahoo.com>
Cc: Julien Blond <julien.blond@gmail.com>,
	David House <dhouse@janestreet.com>,
	OCaml mailing-list <caml-list@inria.fr>
Message-ID: <20130521142209.GC9228@annexia.org>
References: <1369060290.43256.YahooMailNeo@web120405.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
 <CAK=fH+iLCr=nShGNP=cjYo356RyaWnkXMMZKLS2LwZiCi9ogzg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAG3nF7WRqkwaSV-LObT_QEiFoXCJU_N3KCFF7=iJS9YVyL2s_g@mail.gmail.com>
 <1369066728.52452.YahooMailNeo@web120405.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <1369066728.52452.YahooMailNeo@web120405.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] The rec/nonrec debate

On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 09:18:48AM -0700, Dario Teixeira wrote:
> On a tangent, I also find it interesting that Mezzo has adopted the
> Haskell convention of type declarations being head-first.  Not that
> I disagree: in fact, one could argue there is some inconsistency in
> the ML/OCaml convention of declaring types head-last and values
> head-first...

IME the OCaml convention is an endless source of confusion for
programmers coming from other languages.  For example compared to
C++'s vector<T>.

By the way, why does Mezzo have to be a completely new language?
Just change the syntax of OCaml and force people to put:

  syntax 4.00;;

at the top of old code (default to new syntax).  The worst that
happens is you have to carry around lots of old parsers in your
compiler.

Rich.