Such a terrible way to cave in to appear more JS-esque. I really hope OCaml community doesn't adopt this style because it's confusing, inelegant and superficial. Viet. On Mon, 11 Dec 2017 at 00:11, Yawar Amin wrote: > Hi Bob, you can find more details about the syntax change and discussion > in this slightly outdated PR: https://github.com/facebook/reason/pull/1299 > > Long story short, you can write let add((m, n)) = m + n. > > Note that the ReasonML project actually includes several long-time members > of the OCaml community. I feel that the new syntax has very well received > in the JavaScript community and it will lead to wider OCaml adoption. It's > a win-win situation. > > Regards, > > Yawar > > On Sun, Dec 10, 2017 at 1:12 PM, Robert Muller > wrote: > >> The team developing ReasonML seems to be experimenting with concrete >> syntax in an effort to make it feel as familiar and natural as possible to >> JavaScript programmers. Seems like a good idea. But the present version >> seems to hardwire parentheses awkwardly for function definitions and calls. >> Parentheses are required for both function definitions and calls. So one >> writes >> >> let incr(n) = n + 1 and incr(5) >> >> but not >> >> let incr n = n + 1 or incr 5 >> >> Fair enough, but for multi-argument functions the parser seems to unroll >> the parenthesized items (both parameters & arguments) to leave curried >> functions. E.g., >> >> let add(m, n) = m + n or equivalently let add = (m, n) => m + n >> >> then add(5, 3) is 8 as one would expect. But the (m, n) in let add(m, n) >> = ... isn't a pattern matching a pair, it's the JS-style sequence of input >> parameters and the definition unrolls to let add = (m) => (n) => ... . So >> add(5) : int -> int and all three of add(5, 3), add(5)(3) and { let add5 = >> add(5); add5(3) } are 8. There's probably a way to write an add function >> of type int * int -> int, but I don't know how to write it. >> >> I'm wondering what the OCaml community makes of this. I find it awkward. >> Bob Muller >> >> >> > -- Kind regards, Viet