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 VAA17747; Wed, 6 Feb 2002 21:52:46 +0100 (MET) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f 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 VAA17639 for ; Wed, 6 Feb 2002 21:52:45 +0100 (MET) Received: from escargot.exelixis.com (shaker.exelixis.com [65.209.203.254]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id g16KqhT17284 for ; Wed, 6 Feb 2002 21:52:44 +0100 (MET) Received: from quasar.ipa.nw.ru (dhcp-172-29-16-196.exelixis.com [172.29.16.196]) by escargot.exelixis.com (8.8.8/8.8.8/GNAC-GW-2.1) with ESMTP id MAA20943; Wed, 6 Feb 2002 12:51:31 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <3C61965C.E6C00DD5@quasar.ipa.nw.ru> Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2002 12:47:24 -0800 From: "Alexander V. Voinov" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Markus Mottl CC: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] syntax foo References: <20020205212131.GA1707@marant.org> <20020206182555.GA32204@fichte.ai.univie.ac.at> <20020206215807.A18430@kruuna.Helsinki.FI> <20020206204142.GB32204@fichte.ai.univie.ac.at> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk Hi All, Markus Mottl wrote: > > let*-form, ie. a sequence of bindings, each of which is in the scope of the I also don't understand (maybe I've read this long ago and forgot the underlying reasoning) why the burden on distinguishing between 'let' and 'let rec' is laid on the programmer? Can't a parser figure out when a function is recursive and when not? I believed that in a functional language all functions are recursive by default. Alexander ------------------- Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr