From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDF60BC32 for ; Wed, 16 Mar 2005 12:23:06 +0100 (CET) Received: from pauillac.inria.fr (pauillac.inria.fr [128.93.11.35]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id j2GBN6rE001470 for ; Wed, 16 Mar 2005 12:23:06 +0100 Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id MAA12919 for ; Wed, 16 Mar 2005 12:23:06 +0100 (MET) Received: from mail.physik.uni-muenchen.de (mail.physik.uni-muenchen.de [192.54.42.129]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id j2GBN5He001465 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for ; Wed, 16 Mar 2005 12:23:05 +0100 Received: from localhost (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by mail.physik.uni-muenchen.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25F9520019; Wed, 16 Mar 2005 12:23:05 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail.physik.uni-muenchen.de ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.physik.uni-muenchen.de [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 29531-01-32; Wed, 16 Mar 2005 12:23:03 +0100 (CET) Received: from mailhost.cip.physik.uni-muenchen.de (kaiser.cip.physik.uni-muenchen.de [141.84.136.1]) by mail.physik.uni-muenchen.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FF8C20010; Wed, 16 Mar 2005 12:23:03 +0100 (CET) Received: from eiger.cip.physik.uni-muenchen.de (eiger.cip.physik.uni-muenchen.de [141.84.136.54]) by mailhost.cip.physik.uni-muenchen.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7325026E87; Wed, 16 Mar 2005 12:23:03 +0100 (CET) Received: by eiger.cip.physik.uni-muenchen.de (Postfix, from userid 3092) id 8724B1E4B9; Wed, 16 Mar 2005 12:23:02 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by eiger.cip.physik.uni-muenchen.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82BC5F2B5; Wed, 16 Mar 2005 12:23:02 +0100 (CET) Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 12:23:02 +0100 (CET) From: Thomas Fischbacher To: Oliver Bandel Cc: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] OCaml troll on Slashdot In-Reply-To: <20050316025532.GA593@first.in-berlin.de> Message-ID: References: <42363A86.6010309@1969.ws> <200503150859.55997.jon@ffconsultancy.com> <200503152036.45894.jon@ffconsultancy.com> <32977.131.254.50.45.1110920621.squirrel@mail.irisa.fr> <172f01077499b3d417604d0ad31f2bdb@cs.unm.edu> <20050316001819.GB347@first.in-berlin.de> <20050316025532.GA593@first.in-berlin.de> X-BOFH: Daemons did it MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at physik.uni-muenchen.de X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 4238171A.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 42381719.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 ocaml:01 oliver:01 bandel:01 syntax:01 quirks:01 cip:98 cip:98 lambda:01 lambda:01 wrote:01 debian:02 physik:02 physik:02 gnu:03 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 (2004-11-16) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled version=3.0.2 X-Spam-Level: On Wed, 16 Mar 2005, Oliver Bandel wrote: > > Second, many people I know still put ";;" cos they were taught that way > > Hey, that was the way I started too! :) I should say, I do it *on purpose*, even knowing that it is not necessary. Why? Putting ";;" or not does not make a difference for the programmer, but not using certain "syntax quirks" makes it easier to operate on the source code with tools, quite in general. -- regards, tf@cip.physik.uni-muenchen.de (o_ Thomas Fischbacher - http://www.cip.physik.uni-muenchen.de/~tf //\ (lambda (n) ((lambda (p q r) (p p q r)) (lambda (g x y) V_/_ (if (= x 0) y (g g (- x 1) (* x y)))) n 1)) (Debian GNU)