From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B000BB9C for ; Mon, 21 Nov 2005 09:09:01 +0100 (CET) Received: from zproxy.gmail.com (zproxy.gmail.com [64.233.162.196]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id jAL890i2029482 for ; Mon, 21 Nov 2005 09:09:01 +0100 Received: by zproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id x3so730658nzd for ; Mon, 21 Nov 2005 00:09:00 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition; b=pyht5vjtlpvfNHElRRZZq6154vJPgiHmtBaVSSIlniBSxED98HzYaibltnjngLqhmdwxIHGtg6RHGNa2pdEoFSEfBqSV9JSIdXeKpQ2ZaxfwB5tmN1+VSRYT4KujsZ/ggB5SmyezfxsEhZIhPlBJONQt0tDdQJLZvDGRloKyOng= Received: by 10.65.122.18 with SMTP id z18mr2627641qbm; Mon, 21 Nov 2005 00:09:00 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.65.52.1 with HTTP; Mon, 21 Nov 2005 00:09:00 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <2a1a1a0c0511210009n24691c9eiad3046e4e0bce779@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 03:09:00 -0500 From: Mike Lin Sender: nilekim@gmail.com To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Subject: object constructor syntax compiler weirdness MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline X-Miltered: at nez-perce with ID 4381809C.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; mikelin:01 syntax:01 compiler:01 syntax:01 3.08.4:01 endline:01 radius:98 radius:98 constructor:01 let:03 let:03 edu:07 rationale:08 i'm:08 curious:09 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.3 (2005-04-27) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_BY_IP autolearn=disabled version=3.0.3 Hello, The following are by no means common or advisable syntax, but I was curious if there is a rationale behind why certain things are syntax errors or not. I'm using 3.08.4 -- apologies if this was fixed or modified in 3.09. class circle radius =3D let pi =3D 3.14159 in object method area =3D pi *. radius *.radius end >> fine class circle2 radius =3D let pi =3D 3.14159 in print_endline "Creating a circle"; object method area =3D pi *. radius *.radius end >> syntax error Most curiously: class circle3 radius =3D let pi =3D 3.14159 in (object method area =3D pi *. radius *.radius end) >> fine class circle4 radius =3D let pi =3D 3.14159 in begin object method area =3D pi *. radius *.radius end end >> syntax error