From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <grettke@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr
Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr
Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104])
	by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65A63BC57
	for <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>; Sat, 29 May 2010 23:27:45 +0200 (CEST)
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AicCAIMjAUzRVdQ0kGdsb2JhbACeNQgVAQEBAQkJDAcRAx+vEIQ7iH0BAQMFhREEg0iKKw
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.53,324,1272837600"; 
   d="scan'208";a="51423393"
Received: from mail-vw0-f52.google.com ([209.85.212.52])
  by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 29 May 2010 23:27:44 +0200
Received: by vws18 with SMTP id 18so1278291vws.39
        for <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>; Sat, 29 May 2010 14:27:44 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:sender:received
         :in-reply-to:references:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject
         :from:to:cc:content-type;
        bh=pM0DbfQvFlfDp7mwAGDf4eypeuGNjyT5OAF46JXLFTc=;
        b=upMuYKbT3YBBwAsaZmD/27yWEh3sCuVpWNJkB8mZGp36G7nevxtW09i71D2d3wmNgd
         pfSzcODrc0Nr1Ev45OZG4VOBzQYGm5qs4Yoeq7tfJOSXofuzwX3HfxZ3rJZHkVxagDiR
         VaVFcwCFkp+GZYQyhJubeEvqSLCghnfNKquTY=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date
         :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type;
        b=g4kles6d/N4v+IjylT0D/06AkufVB9JQwqjAZy21HiXodicvdttCNhmEo0TjsKolIs
         9lCJTlM4xRsVgJ/S6ZHdFnKsaiZtMTHpR8kLnC/rTp84Hh2JLm5BjXWxSgtqW+XdtjZr
         /e8VUiYnmnczqFK/2BVa5wimBmJaGa9bnJR0I=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.220.123.5 with SMTP id n5mr1719102vcr.109.1275168464181; Sat, 
	29 May 2010 14:27:44 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: grettke@gmail.com
Received: by 10.220.170.200 with HTTP; Sat, 29 May 2010 14:27:44 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <7d8707de1002170909w34ec675fse28c4951d6b52e13@mail.gmail.com>
References: <756daca51002160847k1a416f01p36cc192d00e25697@mail.gmail.com>
	<201002161808.21283.jon@ffconsultancy.com>
	<7d8707de1002170909w34ec675fse28c4951d6b52e13@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 29 May 2010 16:27:44 -0500
X-Google-Sender-Auth: B90gwmXPdGSWYggOComt0tdiZ2g
Message-ID: <AANLkTikx_sWByaxZRrMdu6wLGmPmgHS4O0QqMAAkg7ci@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: WAS Re: [Caml-list] Re: The need to specify 'rec' in a recursive 
	function defintion
From: Grant Rettke <grettke@acm.org>
To: Andrej Bauer <andrej.bauer@andrej.com>
Cc: Jon Harrop <jon@ffconsultancy.com>, caml-list@yquem.inria.fr
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Spam: no; 0.00; recursive:01 defintion:01 andrej:01 andrej:01 semantics:01 syntax:01 syntax:01 lexical:01 wrote:01 rec:01 caml-list:01 emotional:94 specify:06 wed:06 acm:08 

On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 12:09 PM, Andrej Bauer <andrej.bauer@andrej.com> wrote:
>>Moreover, the burden of "rec" is tiny so I don't think it is worth
>>discussing in such detail.
>
> Ah, but you are forgetting Wadler's Law.

You mean this:

" Wadler's Law:
       The emotional intensity of debate on a language feature
       increases as one moves down the following scale:
           Semantics,
           Syntax,
           Lexical syntax,
           Comments."?