From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.105])
	by walapai.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id q03066PI026254
	for <caml-list@sympa-roc.inria.fr>; Tue, 3 Jan 2012 01:06:06 +0100
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Ai4EAHJFAk9KfVI0kGdsb2JhbABCggWDCqdFCCIBAQEBCQkNBxQEIYFyAQEBBBICDx0BGx0BAwwGAwILDQICJgICIQEBEQEFARwGEwgaoAEKix1IgmuDeT+IcQIFC4EkiUqBFgSVAopvgw49g3s
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.71,446,1320620400"; 
   d="scan'208";a="125343174"
Received: from mail-ww0-f52.google.com ([74.125.82.52])
  by mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-SHA; 03 Jan 2012 01:06:01 +0100
Received: by wgbdr12 with SMTP id dr12so31446163wgb.9
        for <caml-list@inria.fr>; Mon, 02 Jan 2012 16:06:00 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to
         :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        bh=oxZG8I+tv3tMljVQDnATEcukZWPYj2cA1vtjCBmFC00=;
        b=c9LIGJVBhuPTK1NriWEIaCljoQtCsCTP0az/EaJr/8ghnvxopQD2+tvE2tF6A3zX7n
         RoBEuo+ZsI2au2toQCbtQSlOEym4ayqCo6LtaIvwJAzUf+P6s7odf2cn9NP1DGzbIzxv
         x3FlD5YYhTqD64a5qGyn1Ra4ipcGvshWEFCeU=
Received: by 10.227.206.10 with SMTP id fs10mr49872125wbb.13.1325549160358;
 Mon, 02 Jan 2012 16:06:00 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.180.3.202 with HTTP; Mon, 2 Jan 2012 16:05:39 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAHqiZ-LhsBa4Xn51dCDAeOpTVMzF8kJCestAGydh5abMHsOidQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAHqiZ-LhsBa4Xn51dCDAeOpTVMzF8kJCestAGydh5abMHsOidQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Lukasz Stafiniak <lukstafi@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2012 01:05:39 +0100
Message-ID: <CAJMfKEU8y0MiRn_1N1qjWQdi7bTzHgVC4xfkLkDrktJUecbngg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Diego Olivier Fernandez Pons <dofp.ocaml@gmail.com>
Cc: caml-list <caml-list@inria.fr>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by walapai.inria.fr id q03066PI026254
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Examples where let rec is undesirable

On Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 11:37 PM, Diego Olivier Fernandez Pons
<dofp.ocaml@gmail.com> wrote:
>     List,
>
> I was wondering if there was any reason not to make "let rec" the default /
> sole option, meaning cases where you clearly don't want a "let rec" instead
> of "let" (only in functions, not cyclic data).
>
>          Diego Olivier

The default "no-rec" allows for name recycling -- using the same name
for an incrementally transformed value, i.e. to bind the intermediate
results. Name recycling minimizes the cognitive burden: there are less
names to remember in a scope, and differences in names are justified
by differences in purpose of the values. Are there reasons to consider
name recycling a bad style?

Happy New Year,
Łukasz