From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <thelema314@gmail.com>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,MISSING_HEADERS,
	SPF_NEUTRAL autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3
X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr
Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr
Received: from discorde.inria.fr (discorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.38])
	by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3944EBC0C
	for <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>; Tue, 16 Jan 2007 07:00:54 +0100 (CET)
Received: from wr-out-0506.google.com (wr-out-0506.google.com [64.233.184.228])
	by discorde.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id l0G60r2e031103
	for <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>; Tue, 16 Jan 2007 07:00:53 +0100
Received: by wr-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id 69so1186879wra
        for <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>; Mon, 15 Jan 2007 22:00:51 -0800 (PST)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=beta;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        b=cCFunWM2zspID8K4OB5WjJFD54fI7f1poxxpeTuAO5nIBktJoZ1MtzYMQPwtIOm7+1AU85Cpv8tG3cVNrrhodebKSAK7gGy3K5t+Ucknnf4GukdfKT8J/UeBB4ziliXL70hxNLiQV8IcHK/f8yjNttnvAlmvIHM2uU+nm5M1eyY=
Received: by 10.65.38.13 with SMTP id q13mr7034756qbj.1168927250556;
        Mon, 15 Jan 2007 22:00:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?192.168.0.18? ( [69.155.31.57])
        by mx.google.com with ESMTP id z21sm7139722qbc.2007.01.15.22.00.49;
        Mon, 15 Jan 2007 22:00:50 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <45AC6A10.2010502@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2007 00:00:48 -0600
From: Edgar Friendly <thelema314@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.9 (X11/20061206)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Ocaml compiler features
References: <45A87011.8080203@gmail.com>	 <20070115103556.GB12311@furbychan.cocan.org>	 <45AC60CB.4070408@gmail.com> <6ebe51ce0701152133m6e945d2emeec59219547b22d2@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <6ebe51ce0701152133m6e945d2emeec59219547b22d2@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 45AC6A15.000 on discorde : j-chkmail score : X : 0/20 1 0.000 -> 1
X-Miltered: at discorde with ID 45AC6A15.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail . ensmp . fr)!
X-Spam: no; 0.00; ocaml:01 compiler:01 semi-colon:01 edgar:98 ketty:98 wrote:01 caml-list:01 imperative:01 cond:02 cond:02 pattern:04 expressions:04 expressions:04 paths:05 separated:05 

ketty wrote:
> you want this to work like it currently does:
> if cond then bla;
> bla_outside_if;
>
I haven't said anything about this pattern.  Definitely if there's an
else, it should allow a group of semi-colon separated expressions in
between.  ...  At the moment, I think that this form of if should stay.

> and this to work like you describe it:
> if cond then bla;
> bla_inside_if;
> else
> inside_else;
> what_about_this; (* ? *)
>
This is the hard choice.  Some sort of "end if" disambiguator would
clean up this whole mess pretty easily, but would be a pain to include
every time, especially when if is used like ?:.

I don't know if this is reasonable, but what about having an
if/then[/else] as now (no semis inside), but also having an
if/then[/else]/end that allows semi-delimited expressions inside?  This
would be light-weight (and non-intrusive), but still allow imperative
programmers their nice compound expressions inside if control paths.

E.