RE: [Caml-list] Newbie comment on constructor syntax

["Soegtrop, Michael" <michael.soegtrop@intel.com>]

Dear Alain,

> Moreover, I'm not sure about the benefit:  how often do you need to
> partially apply a constructor?  And it's easy to define manually the helper
> function (let a x y = A (x, y)) if needed.  I don't think adding dedicated syntax
> is justified here.

I see the main benefit of an explicit syntax for "constructor term" vs "currying constructor function" vs "tuple constructor function" in making it obvious that there is such a distinction.

I would agree with Romain, that for record fields a "functionify" operator would be of more practical use and also that it would also make sense to use the same "functionify" operator for different constructs which are not functions but have some obvious conversion into functions.

Best regards,

Michael
Intel Deutschland GmbH
Registered Address: Am Campeon 10-12, 85579 Neubiberg, Germany
Tel: +49 89 99 8853-0, www.intel.de
Managing Directors: Christin Eisenschmid, Christian Lamprechter
Chairperson of the Supervisory Board: Nicole Lau
Registered Office: Munich
Commercial Register: Amtsgericht Muenchen HRB 186928