On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 11:49 AM, David Teller <David.Teller@univ-orleans.fr> wrote:

camlp5... We're also not discussing original vs. revised syntax vs. twt
[yet], although if you consider that some extension would be much more
useful if rendered compatible with one of these syntaxes, please mention
it.
 
FWIW, most quickie syntactic sugar extensions that are confined to single lines of code work seamlessly with twt. I use pa_compr all the time, for example. I think open_in and try...finally are currently problematic, but if they do become some kind of de facto standard then I would have no problem hacking them into this already-badly-hacked preprocessor. In the future, someone needs to do twt right; it works well enough for me right now that I have no motivation to do so.
 
-Mike