From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id KAA09674; Fri, 11 Jan 2002 10:46:46 +0100 (MET) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: (from weis@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id KAA32468 for caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr; Fri, 11 Jan 2002 10:46:46 +0100 (MET) Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id RAA19858 for ; Thu, 10 Jan 2002 17:40:23 +0100 (MET) Received: from sj1-3-4-9.securesites.net (sj1-3-4-9.securesites.net [192.220.127.202]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id g0AGeML05063 for ; Thu, 10 Jan 2002 17:40:22 +0100 (MET) Received: (qmail 3152 invoked by uid 16863); 10 Jan 2002 16:40:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost) ([192.220.65.223]) (envelope-sender ) by 192.220.65.223 (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 10 Jan 2002 16:40:20 -0000 Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 16:40:20 +0000 (GMT) From: Brian Rogoff To: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: [Caml-list] Caml historical question Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk OK Caml history buffs, I have a question which arose during my proofreading of a chapter of the forthcoming bestseller "Developing Applications with Objective Caml" (Stephen King, watch out!). In the current translation, it is mentioned that "fun" is a legacy of older versions of Caml and it is insinuated that the "fun" form is somehow deprecated in favor of fun. What's the straight dope? I note that in the hypermodern Revised syntax, which I happen to like, it is actually "function" which is suppressed, and fun lives on. -- Brian ------------------- Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr