From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.105]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F0E6BBAF for ; Mon, 15 Feb 2010 21:36:45 +0100 (CET) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AlsEAP4+eUtQW+UMgWdsb2JhbACbFhUBARYkI70hhFsEgxSHXw X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,479,1262559600"; d="scan'208";a="57070211" Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]) by mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 15 Feb 2010 21:36:45 +0100 Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Nh7gP-00055v-4w for caml-list@inria.fr; Mon, 15 Feb 2010 21:36:41 +0100 Received: from 69-165-142-39.dsl.teksavvy.com ([69.165.142.39]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 15 Feb 2010 21:36:41 +0100 Received: from monnier by 69-165-142-39.dsl.teksavvy.com with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 15 Feb 2010 21:36:41 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: caml-list@inria.fr From: Stefan Monnier Subject: Re: The need to specify 'rec' in a recursive function defintion Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2010 15:36:19 -0500 Message-ID: References: <1e7471d51002091250of7a686fq537a03c9401c868f@mail.gmail.com> <9d3ec8301002101425k356b92e0p6ca2690d8cd6399d@mail.gmail.com> <201002151733.37298.jon@ffconsultancy.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 69-165-142-39.dsl.teksavvy.com User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1.92 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:HXgjG4gkgvz3CM/F/px5W0Rd7ZE= Sender: news X-Spam: no; 0.00; recursive:01 defintion:01 extensively:01 sml:01 rec:01 rec:01 incompatible:01 specify:06 standard:07 written:07 disagree:08 function:08 fun:08 feature:09 feature:09 >> Till Varoquaux had written: >> > Let's make things clear here: the "rec" *really* is a feature; >> Nobody said otherwise. Eliminating the "rec" is also a feature. >> Those two features are mostly incompatible, and many reasonable people >> disagree on which one of the two is more important. >> Stefan "who extensively used that feature in SML, but happens >> to prefer the other feature nevertheless" > Standard ML doesn't have the feature that Till described. It sure does, tho not with "fun" but only with "var" definitions. Stefan