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=0.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL 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 42A90BBC1 for ; Fri, 2 May 2008 13:54:53 +0200 (CEST) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApoEAEGdGkjAXQIm/2dsb2JhbACmKIVb X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.27,426,1204498800"; d="scan'208";a="25759301" Received: from discorde.inria.fr ([192.93.2.38]) by mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 02 May 2008 13:54:53 +0200 Received: from mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.83]) by discorde.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id m42BsqXl010364 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=OK) for ; Fri, 2 May 2008 13:54:52 +0200 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgQDALedGkhIDtybc2dsb2JhbACRYgEMAwQECQ8FlBGFWw X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.27,426,1204498800"; d="scan'208";a="10318185" Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com ([72.14.220.155]) by mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 02 May 2008 13:54:52 +0200 Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id 13so904286fge.25 for ; Fri, 02 May 2008 04:54:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:from:to:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject:date:references:x-mailer:sender; bh=qFq84jwSaeV47/kXmvCh49ciqSA3swJSTPR0xrfaeag=; b=BJ1pCR3WKXpjnkotp4VE3cVocwTfATZU0t/VjVCyxoH/Kr3LTTi5nY9rklVOjwlTEEcHwMFLNUgBm7y1/EpCVsY38uuIQcKZDMNZ2RoYL80LWX2Xwk9+hOV1zdtqEm77DndwmgVYYA7dpfVmctejjtU2vCBPDjflGU1THm4sNuA= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:from:to:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject:date:references:x-mailer:sender; b=lN4pQLr8GQ6lTLf6n9Txwubz+yrRreC161xTa2XyYGwWNT0fOkTjDOtljsiZyRwacp+zaXLqnWQtzI5ttHEfCRPHIodOQKAH86cZZa81McVrbQmICZ5VrnVGRGEFNRQW2jLQ2OpBwf5g/1elLv6Ja/6Rfi2YGrmKP80AxxvE7ow= Received: by 10.86.74.15 with SMTP id w15mr5209634fga.4.1209729292139; Fri, 02 May 2008 04:54:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?192.168.1.37? ( [85.2.110.59]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id d4sm2179183fga.4.2008.05.02.04.54.51 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Fri, 02 May 2008 04:54:51 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <2B71D022-538D-45CB-BCF9-B48A63187DD4@erratique.ch> From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Daniel_B=FCnzli?= To: List caml-list In-Reply-To: <481ADD86.3000802@frisch.fr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v919.2) Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Should a /\ operator be possible? Date: Fri, 2 May 2008 13:54:37 +0200 References: <20080501194149.GA30095@annexia.org> <20080501212023.GA373@annexia.org> <481ADD86.3000802@frisch.fr> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.919.2) Sender: =?UTF-8?B?RGFuaWVsIELDvG56bGk=?= X-Miltered: at discorde with ID 481B010C.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail . ensmp . fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; bunzli:01 buenzli:01 syntax:01 literals:01 invoke:01 caml-list:01 alain:01 string:02 handles:03 identifiers:04 identifiers:04 daniel:04 daniel:04 problem:05 long:06 The unicode standard dicusses a syntax for identifiers here [1]. Note that determining if two identifiers are equal needs to invoke the unicode normalization machinery, it is not just a matter of knowing what is a letter and a symbol. That being said, I really don't see unicode identifiers as a must have feature, au contraire. Regarding the use of math symbols, I think Alain is right, it should be addressed as a presentation issue. Actually that's the way Fortress [3] handles it, as a rendering issue. Speaking of using UTF-8 in source files, it was recently pointed out to me that this is not a problem as long as you use only ASCII identifiers. The advantage is that you can have UTF-8 string literals in your source code. Best, Daniel [1] http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr31/ [2] http://research.sun.com/projects/plrg/Publications/fortress.1.0.pdf