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 HAA30405; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 07:24:48 +0200 (MET DST) 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 HAA30091 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 07:24:47 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from imac.sobor.org (adsl-63-198-183-99.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net [63.198.183.99]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id g775Oj520648 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 07:24:46 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from quasar.ipa.nw.ru (unknown [192.168.123.51]) by imac.sobor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10E06102ADD0; Tue, 6 Aug 2002 22:24:44 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3D50AF3E.8965A1DE@quasar.ipa.nw.ru> Date: Tue, 06 Aug 2002 22:25:18 -0700 From: "Alexander V. Voinov" Organization: Fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jacques Garrigue , caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] ocaml-mode-3.05 References: <20020805154908L.garrigue@kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp> <200208061837.48621.jeffrey.palmer@acm.org> <20020807091842P.garrigue@kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk Hi All, Jacques Garrigue wrote: > > From: Jeffrey Palmer > > > Can anyone give a quick comparison of the Tuareg ocaml mode and > > ocaml-mode-3.05? Is the indentation better/standardized in one > > vs. the other, support for font-locking, etc. > > I'm not a Tuareg mode user myself (not surprising) I'm not in a position to argue on either of these modes, but I use tuareg and it satisfies all my needs. I only remember that I switched to it from some other mode which was less satisfactory. > but my > understanding is that they have different indentation styles. > ocaml-mode indents like the sources of the ocaml compiler > (mutual relation: it was fashioned after them, and developpers use it) I'm not sure that this argument is decisive for us, plain users. Add to this that there is no concensus on the merits of OCaml syntax itself... There are some extremely experienced FP users among us (not me), who don't like it. I can't dismiss this fact as something "subjective". I have no intention to offend you by this, but... this is reality: we are all different. Alexander ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners