From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Original-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104]) by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9A13F7EE51 for ; Sat, 25 May 2013 01:53:36 +0200 (CEST) Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of siraaj@khandkar.net) identity=pra; client-ip=128.177.27.134; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="siraaj@khandkar.net"; x-sender="siraaj@khandkar.net"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of siraaj@khandkar.net) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=128.177.27.134; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="siraaj@khandkar.net"; x-sender="siraaj@khandkar.net"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of postmaster@newcavia.khandkar.net) identity=helo; client-ip=128.177.27.134; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="siraaj@khandkar.net"; x-sender="postmaster@newcavia.khandkar.net"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgAFAIz8n1GAsRuG/2dsb2JhbABagwjCZ4EHFnSCIwEBBAE6PwULCxguVwYTiAcGuWSOajMHgnNhA51ZiyKDKw X-IPAS-Result: AgAFAIz8n1GAsRuG/2dsb2JhbABagwjCZ4EHFnSCIwEBBAE6PwULCxguVwYTiAcGuWSOajMHgnNhA51ZiyKDKw X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.87,738,1363129200"; d="scan'208";a="15633775" Received: from newcavia.khandkar.net ([128.177.27.134]) by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 25 May 2013 01:53:35 +0200 Received: from [10.0.1.3] (pool-108-46-62-235.nycmny.fios.verizon.net [108.46.62.235]) by newcavia.khandkar.net (Postfix) with ESMTPA id AD6441A632F; Fri, 24 May 2013 19:53:33 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.3 \(1503\)) From: Siraaj Khandkar In-Reply-To: <20130524233015.GE1923@siouxsie> Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 19:53:33 -0400 Cc: Arnaud Spiwack , OCaML Mailing List Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <37A1A2D3-5993-4675-9937-ED3965793D1D@khandkar.net> References: <20130523235355.GI6510@siouxsie> <20130524233015.GE1923@siouxsie> To: oliver X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1503) Subject: Re: [Caml-list] OCaml's variables On May 24, 2013, at 7:30 PM, oliver wrote: > On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 11:01:39AM +0200, Arnaud Spiwack wrote: >> Why were you astounded? This is a perfectly legitimate/correct use of the >> word "variable". > [...] >=20 >=20 > Do you think so? >=20 > I have thought about making the sentence better, but did not found > a better sentence in short time. >=20 > But name-value-binding is the term that is used in functional languages. > I wonder why the term "variable" pops up there. > And even I understood the sentence, I'm not sure if this might create con= fusion > to some readers, because the term "variable" is normally not used for fun= ctional languages. >=20 > People new to FP will be said, there are no "variables", and then they ma= ybe > will be irritated, if they find that term in a reference-manual. >=20 > Do you see what I mean? If you think of functions as equations, non-constant values are variables. Imperative languages don't get to claim the term just because they misused = it for a long time ;) Think of the word "hacker" - it was hijacked and misused for a while, but I feel like it has mostly been recovered these days. Perhaps we can recover t= he accepted meaning of variables if we consistently contrast them with referen= ce cells. --=20 Siraaj Khandkar .o. o.o ..o o.. .o. ..o .oo o.o .oo ..o ooo .o. .oo oo. ooo