From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdsfh1@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr
Delivered-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr
Received: from mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.83])
	by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CB4067EE25
	for <caml-list@sympa.inria.fr>; Wed, 30 Oct 2013 22:33:36 +0100 (CET)
Received-SPF: None (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  gdsfh1@gmail.com) identity=pra; client-ip=209.85.223.173;
  receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="gdsfh1@gmail.com";
  x-sender="gdsfh1@gmail.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible
Received-SPF: Pass (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: domain of
  gdsfh1@gmail.com designates 209.85.223.173 as permitted
  sender) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=209.85.223.173;
  receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="gdsfh1@gmail.com";
  x-sender="gdsfh1@gmail.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible;
  x-record-type="v=spf1"
Received-SPF: None (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  postmaster@mail-ie0-f173.google.com) identity=helo;
  client-ip=209.85.223.173;
  receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="gdsfh1@gmail.com";
  x-sender="postmaster@mail-ie0-f173.google.com";
  x-conformance=sidf_compatible
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: At0DAPN5cVLRVd+tlGdsb2JhbABZhBODE7xLgSIIFg4BAQEBBwsLCRIqgiUBAQQBIx0BGx4DAQsGBQsDDAImAgIiAREBBQEcBogHAQMJBpwvjARTgwqEOQoZJw1kiQEBBQyBHY4tgmqBQgOYCpAdGCmEUzo
X-IPAS-Result: At0DAPN5cVLRVd+tlGdsb2JhbABZhBODE7xLgSIIFg4BAQEBBwsLCRIqgiUBAQQBIx0BGx4DAQsGBQsDDAImAgIiAREBBQEcBogHAQMJBpwvjARTgwqEOQoZJw1kiQEBBQyBHY4tgmqBQgOYCpAdGCmEUzo
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.93,604,1378850400"; 
   d="scan'208";a="39808713"
Received: from mail-ie0-f173.google.com ([209.85.223.173])
  by mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-SHA; 30 Oct 2013 22:33:21 +0100
Received: by mail-ie0-f173.google.com with SMTP id u16so3467596iet.32
        for <caml-list@inria.fr>; Wed, 30 Oct 2013 14:33:34 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :content-type;
        bh=EG5sQpqKMhKundnEMbC/y8eYF45rk575LsTQCqGaecI=;
        b=ls4I2Qxt8WZT0dzIknQii/i3044MKkf01TxfJdieNCPcVIg0qYyd+dzLINQImS7bXk
         ahzuiCLT+X0i9PeoBtb2kOHp2UfcS/nGHIhR3My8wAuusCGuDm/4ddGYJJi0HFPAZWfc
         7D5rXNYdVakU3faqeT32IKaLe7iMtA8PoiA98P0xoGWVLzwK9+ScUN2pCJZmRWmJ8Eho
         XBa1UAiNvcjz9oy7Ev3T2H4mZXWdot1kM67JUjwIZyZpcOcL0ZftqF5DdX6K9Kz6QnrV
         bkm9ZMbwHL/ARNGEhLN9BqzcmgQ387RnIMgCU07ruYsQgVSlsAcRsdKB3O0BiXUGL+ZZ
         aO9w==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.43.103.133 with SMTP id di5mr4626734icc.38.1383168814800;
 Wed, 30 Oct 2013 14:33:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.43.159.197 with HTTP; Wed, 30 Oct 2013 14:33:34 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <1383167277.75943.YahooMailNeo@web120402.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
References: <CAJMfKEXbT=g4Ha9=p3aaFtMqAbuhzuYFi5ff8DsrRS6D7hsRyg@mail.gmail.com>
	<1383167277.75943.YahooMailNeo@web120402.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2013 23:33:34 +0200
Message-ID: <CAPi0vKXA+80vOn6e1C7en=2rfMUsYjEtp_kF=0=3Y1V26sY8+Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: Dmitry Grebeniuk <gdsfh1@gmail.com>
To: Dario Teixeira <caml-list@inria.fr>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Operator for Lazy.force?

Hello.

> However, I'm not sure it should be part of a
> standard library.  There are projects which
> do not use Lazy, and instead define the (!!)
> operator to be something else convenient
> for whatever task they perform.

  So theirs ( !! ) operator will override Pervasives' one.
What's the problem?  Anyway projects you've mentioned don't use Lazy,
so there's no chance of "operator clash".