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=0.0 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE 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 0B092BBC1 for ; Sat, 26 Apr 2008 00:25:24 +0200 (CEST) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvUAAJL3EUjRVZK2c2dsb2JhbACCNTaOcAEMAwQECQ+VVIR7 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.25,709,1199660400"; d="scan'208";a="25508227" Received: from wa-out-1112.google.com ([209.85.146.182]) by mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 26 Apr 2008 00:25:23 +0200 Received: by wa-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id k17so5821276waf.3 for ; Fri, 25 Apr 2008 15:25:22 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references:x-google-sender-auth; bh=WhaJ8gWMkim5QyvUnjfqJAVxY4r2RkXL0ziXhgkfLOY=; b=WKo76UzmVFQ8V/w3/j+EWjG2swAZNDpMLcwxKoT7aejWhDeP8DvI2SnB9bzR0U0cgeo3ZfSZq8GlWw+VqRgqkQkfgR+T2jbq77pfKGYgEOCK8vMjcrkIdAgdbwqLk8GHdVMIN2TAXgo3NKoE5UkkoUiPxpG+xnY9KsO8hdiiWBM= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=R1mnc+QOBHToK40yUjjYTugiodiaZReNxVrFG0fwtRc0fnoLxsg3+xKjCsYOTLXuiJiYyfRSeAGDKCk/QJWpHKlCSKOc9TIe4qrsFmUf6uNbo4FYl/moE8PglW8irpP6dRe3eWyQ98Z8ftx2zfM+lXfOxQ5I9eQVb+MaRDM6oKs= Received: by 10.114.58.1 with SMTP id g1mr3763409waa.179.1209162321891; Fri, 25 Apr 2008 15:25:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.114.95.19 with HTTP; Fri, 25 Apr 2008 15:25:21 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <2a1a1a0c0804251525p44a43599v60cad7a14d77c925@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2008 18:25:21 -0400 From: "Mike Lin" Sender: nilekim@gmail.com To: Caml Subject: Re: [Caml-list] [OSR] Standard syntax extensions ? In-Reply-To: <1209052182.6180.35.camel@Blefuscu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_2943_16052254.1209162321875" References: <1209052182.6180.35.camel@Blefuscu> X-Google-Sender-Auth: a37c1f8a7ceec296 X-Spam: no; 0.00; mikelin:01 syntax:01 univ-orleans:01 camlp:01 syntax:01 syntaxes:01 fwiw:01 -mike:01 univ-orleans:01 camlp:01 syntaxes:01 fwiw:01 -mike:01 wrote:01 wrote:01 ------=_Part_2943_16052254.1209162321875 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 11:49 AM, David Teller 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 ------=_Part_2943_16052254.1209162321875 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline
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
------=_Part_2943_16052254.1209162321875--