On 19/08/07, John Carr wrote: > > > OCaml has a badly designed syntax processed by a badly implemented > parser feeding into a backend that generates poor error messages. > All this makes the language hard to use. > I would just like to know, what exactly do you think is badly designed, and what would be a better alternative? Mind that I am not defending OCaml's syntax here (I have grown accustumed to it, but I do not find it superb... probably...), I just think that all criticism should be constructive (that is, shut up unless you've got a better idea). I would also like to hear some improvements that could be made to the syntax (of OCaml or possibly some future functional language), as I think that currently, OCaml syntax is better than both SML and Haskell. One possible complaint I see here is too many parenthenses and therefore confusing eror messages, however I prefer denser code to the way it was "fixed" in the revised syntax by adding more closing terminals... - Tom (I hope you get what I'm saying... I'm somehow lost...)