From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Status: No, score=3.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,DNS_FROM_RFC_POST, HTML_MESSAGE,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 mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.82]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7B75BBC4 for ; Wed, 15 Apr 2009 13:01:23 +0200 (CEST) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AsMCAONa5UlKfSwckGdsb2JhbACCJi+SfD8BAQEBCQkMBxEDqiUHgQKQPQEDAQODewaFVA X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.38,431,1233529200"; d="scan'208";a="27719225" Received: from yx-out-2324.google.com ([74.125.44.28]) by mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 15 Apr 2009 13:01:23 +0200 Received: by yx-out-2324.google.com with SMTP id 8so1950918yxm.3 for ; Wed, 15 Apr 2009 04:01:22 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:reply-to:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=lRChtaQXkEVaJChg2UyKhlIiM5l0zvyQ2wBKMKY6cRk=; b=Te6W3a6rOCcIx8GNh/6XPxjx8UtDll6DCEeVEFexqbDZeNlj0WQ/Q9eP46M9K/v40u fydu6lmKRX+eEahVOpj6nAoG6cAJSh9FlApK4d525NELlWyuo+0P1hx+18HjYVRVi8wa N+vR0HHyHmKVqTLWapgO0uBHHW6rJJW3eEx/g= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:reply-to:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; b=g3WxUDFjh8gvZDqmmcwZExexYzByI19mGDMXl3+rY9APgySzcTYdWWVcIi1dmkOSAO wsefeQG4F/Lzn7HOBkED/81So+bHqP+wFV1hzOKx4Md2eYbrbgAsCzj9hBvHWHs3uoPX RzUu+CtsL9Lh7CmDaYqfPiApLO5goLMZZ/7Fo= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.100.142.19 with SMTP id p19mr77917and.145.1239793281923; Wed, 15 Apr 2009 04:01:21 -0700 (PDT) Reply-To: yminsky@gmail.com In-Reply-To: <49E5A930.4020508@ens-lyon.org> References: <87skkbuxx8.fsf@aryx.cs.uiuc.edu> <891bd3390904141744k4516f3d0y551f6c572ccadad5@mail.gmail.com> <527cf6bc0904150041u7fa9e30dt3c5b5b8b0ab67ebf@mail.gmail.com> <49E5A930.4020508@ens-lyon.org> Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 07:01:21 -0400 Message-ID: <891bd3390904150401sb4b9ac4jef38bef736e82c27@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [Caml-list] pattern matching and records vs tuples From: Yaron Minsky To: Martin Jambon Cc: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e644d6ee2a0536046795de85 X-Spam: no; 0.00; yaron:01 minsky:01 yminsky:01 ens-lyon:01 yaron:01 minsky:01 yminsky:01 syntax:01 post-:01 camlp:01 oandrieu:01 ocaml:01 ocaml:01 syntax:01 foo:01 --0016e644d6ee2a0536046795de85 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 5:30 AM, Martin Jambon wrote: > blue storm wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 2:44 AM, Yaron Minsky wrote: > > That part is achieved by the pa_records [1] syntax extension. > > To my knowledge, it has not been port to post-3.10 camlp4 yet, but if > > you're interested, I could probably do it. > > > > [1] http://oandrieu.nerim.net/ocaml/#pa_records > > It's in the works for the next release of OCaml, according to Xavier > Leroy's > talk at the OCaml meeting in Grenoble (Feb 2009). What's in the works? The lighter record syntax (let { foo; bar } = x) or the exhaustiveness check on record matches? I vaguely remember hearing something about the former, but not the latter. y --0016e644d6ee2a0536046795de85 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 5:30 AM, Martin = Jambon <= martin.jambon@ens-lyon.org> wrote:
blue storm wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 2:44 AM, Yaron Minsky <yminsky@gmail.com> wrote:
> That part is achieved by the pa_records [1] syntax extension.
> To my knowledge, it has not been port to post-3.10 camlp4 yet, but if<= br> > you're interested, I could probably do it.
>
> [1] http://oandrieu.nerim.net/ocaml/#pa_records

It's in the works for the next release of OCaml, according = to Xavier Leroy's
talk at the OCaml meeting in Grenoble (Feb 2009).

What= 's in the works?=A0 The lighter record syntax (let { foo; bar } =3D x) = or the exhaustiveness check on record matches?=A0 I vaguely remember hearin= g something about the former, but not the latter.

y

--0016e644d6ee2a0536046795de85--