[Caml-list] Re: [Caml-announce] G'Caml, Caml with Extensional polymorphism extension

[Chris Hecker <checker@d6.com>]

[I just noticed this thread has been on caml-announce.  I've switched it over.  Perhaps the reply-to header on caml-announce should be set to caml-list?]

>> Can I make a minor syntax request?  Can this be called "typecase" instead of
>> "case" to prevent confusion with the "match with" operator and SML's "case"?
>Sorry, but I just do not want to type *8* (not 4) more letters 
>for each generic binding.

You're kidding, right?  A syntax decision on an important feature that has no backwards compatibility restrictions and will be with us forever is being made because you don't want to type 4 more characters?  Dude, look into dabbrev-expand or bind a key to (insert "typecase") or something.  

This is exactly how languages get to the point where a newcomer decides to start learning it and quickly says, "what the hell were they thinking?"  Sometimes over and over again.

>Let me write some history of the generic binding. The "generic
>... case" syntax was originally proposed in the POPL'95 paper by
>Catherine Dubois, Fran\c{c}ois Rouaix and Pierre Weis. 

SML's had it since, what, 1970?

> Actually, it is not mandatory to write "case" in G'Caml.

Then do that instead.  I'm fine with not having to type it at all, but then make that the official syntax and don't make case a reserved word.  Yes, I guarantee having it in there is going to be confusing to new people.  Please, either remove it, or change it to typecase (or whatever), before it's too late.

Chris


-------------------
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