From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id RAA01977; Mon, 9 Apr 2001 17:21:21 +0200 (MET DST) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: (from weis@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id RAA01972 for caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr; Mon, 9 Apr 2001 17:21:20 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id KAA21332 for ; Mon, 9 Apr 2001 10:12:14 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (ppp41.dyn147.pacific.net.au [210.23.147.41]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f398CAf08244 for ; Mon, 9 Apr 2001 10:12:10 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from ozemail.com.au (IDENT:root@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.localdomain (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA01395; Mon, 9 Apr 2001 18:11:42 +1000 Message-ID: <3AD16EBE.831E8DD@ozemail.com.au> Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2001 18:11:42 +1000 From: John Max Skaller X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Chris Hecker CC: Judicael Courant , Jacques Garrigue , caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Future of labels, and ideas for library labelling References: <20010402123958K.garrigue@kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp> <4.3.2.7.2.20010402232928.00d3b180@shell16.ba.best.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk Chris Hecker wrote: > I also feel (like Patrick) that there are more important things > (overloading, module recursion, generics) that need fixing than labeling right now. I beg to differ. The current status is the result of an incomplete merger of two communities, who have agreed to use a common tool (ocaml with two modes) to unify the ocaml development environment and provide a vehicle for experiments leading to further unification of the language. The next step is surely to further unify our efforts, by eliminating the duality in the languages that shared tool processes. It is OK, IMHO, to introduce a duality in the libraries to do this. Now the theoreticians and implementors can focus their attention better. The next step is to eliminate the duality in the libraries. This will probably require some cleanups in the core language, as well as some willingness for users to migrate. It is likely there will be a further cleanup. So we have done step 1 of a four (4) step process. I've always thought finishing a job was a sensible high priority. -- John (Max) Skaller, mailto:skaller@maxtal.com.au 10/1 Toxteth Rd Glebe NSW 2037 Australia voice: 61-2-9660-0850 checkout Vyper http://Vyper.sourceforge.net download Interscript http://Interscript.sourceforge.net ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr. Archives: http://caml.inria.fr