Re: [Caml-list] Language feature stability levels

["Milan Stanojević" <milanst@gmail.com>]

I'm not sure that current compiler architecture can easily support
your suggestion.
It does sound nice but I'm afraid it would lead to a combinatorial
explosion in the code, handling different cases where an extension
might be on or off.
A lot of recent ocaml language extension have subtle interactions with
each other that can easily lead to bugs, even unsoundness.


> While I'm not suggesting playing it fast and loose like haskell, perhaps it
> makes sense to have stages of integration into the language. I suggest 3
> stages, borrowing the terminology from software release cycles (but
> perfectly willing to use other terminology or number of stages). An alpha
> feature is one that was just introduced, and is still likely to change in
> future versions. An alpha feature that has survived enough ocaml version
> iterations and seems useful and complete can move into beta level. I foresee
> features spending a long time in the beta state, which also guarantees the
> users a further level of stability over alpha features.

So features then turned on and off by level? E.g. all alpha features
or on or none?