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

[Romain Bardou <romain@cryptosense.com>]

> That being said it's true that most of the time when I use a constructor
> as a function, the constructor has arity 1. In fact, most of the time it
> is Some.

For the record, I'm writing code right now which contains a rather 
common example with arity 2: binary operators in an AST.

type ast =
   | Plus of t * t
   | ...

let add_list l =
   match l with
     | [] -> ...
     | hd :: tl -> List.fold_left (fun a b -> Plus (a, b)) hd tl

It's not partially applied but it does need to be curried. I'm not 
saying that it justifies a new syntax in itself :)

-- 
Romain