Re: [Caml-list] Newbie comment on constructor syntax

[Alain Frisch <alain.frisch@lexifi.com>]

On 09/11/2015 11:35, Andreas Rossberg wrote:
> On 11/09/2015 11:16 AM, Alain Frisch wrote:
>> On 09/11/2015 09:09, Soegtrop, Michael wrote:
>>> The notation looks like tuples, both in definition and use, but it
>>> isn't.
>>
>> The should be not big obstacle to allow using real tuples
>> (values/patterns) with multi-argument constructors, thus perhaps
>> reducing the confusion.  In expression at least, this should be quite
>> straightfoward because it can be understood as a local syntactic
>> rewriting ("C e" -> "let (x1, ..., xn) = e in C (x1, ..., xn)" when C is
>> a constructor with arity > 1 and "e" is not a syntactic tuple).
>>
>> See:
>> http://caml.inria.fr/mantis/view.php?id=6455
>
> Yes please, I would appreciate such sugar.

I've submitted a quick patch that covers expressions only (not patterns) 
on the Mantis ticket.  I'm not very satisfied with the implementation 
technique nor the lack of symmetry with patterns, so I won't propose it 
for inclusion in this form.

-- Alain