(On the other hand, the remark that the existing uses of keyword-bang in
the language, namely (method!) and (open!), could now be represented as
annotations is fairly reasonable.)

On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 9:34 AM, Alain Frisch <alain@frisch.fr> wrote:

> On 01/19/2015 08:33 AM, oleg@okmij.org wrote:
>
>> Current OCaml syntax has shortage of pattern binding expression and
>>> only usable is let%xxx p = e in which is a bit pain for ppx writers.
>>>
>>
>> Indeed. One may wish that
>>
>>          let rec p = e1 in e2
>>
>> were treated as if it were
>>          let[@ocaml.let "rec"] p = e1 in e2
>>
>> and likewise let module.
>>
>
> Please, no!  Attributes are intended to add meta-data for external tools
> (ppx, tools parsing .cmt files, etc), perhaps also to tweak the behavior of
> the compiler (trigger/control warnings, etc), certainly not to encode core
> language features (otherwise, let's use s-expressions instead of
> Parsetree).  Facilitating language experiments is also a good use for
> attributes, but not as a long-term solution for the official compiler.
>
>  Come to think of it, 'rec! or 'module' are
>> annotations on let.
>>
>
> "let module" has a different shape (module identifiers/types/expressions)
> than "let".  And it doesn't seem realistic to merge, say, core types and
> module types, or core expressions and module expressions.
>
>
> Alain
>
>
> --
> Caml-list mailing list.  Subscription management and archives:
> https://sympa.inria.fr/sympa/arc/caml-list
> Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners
> Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs
>