* [Caml-list] camlp4: will there be problems w/many extensions?
@ 2002-09-05 16:33 jehenrik
0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: jehenrik @ 2002-09-05 16:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: caml-list
I am relying on a syntax for records which relies on adding six
extensions to the grammar for every new record type. Is this bad? For
now my program has only about 10 record types, but I'm worried that if
some point I start loading down the parser, I'll have to go rewrite my
macros to use a little different syntax and their own namespaces for the
record information. (And of course muck through my source code which
uses them.) Is this a useful concern? Would it be good practice to
change it anyway?
Jeff Henrikson
-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] only message in thread
only message in thread, other threads:[~2002-09-05 16:30 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: (only message) (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2002-09-05 16:33 [Caml-list] camlp4: will there be problems w/many extensions? jehenrik
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).