From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <David.Teller@univ-orleans.fr>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=disabled 
	version=3.1.3
Received: from mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.82])
	by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E144BBC1
	for <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>; Tue,  4 Mar 2008 11:25:36 +0100 (CET)
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgAAABCyzEfBMVMQk2dsb2JhbACQdwEBAQEHBAYJIJsd
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.25,444,1199660400"; 
   d="scan'208";a="8923924"
Received: from minbis.univ-orleans.fr (HELO min.univ-orleans.fr) ([193.49.83.16])
  by mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 04 Mar 2008 11:25:35 +0100
Received: from smtps.univ-orleans.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by min.univ-orleans.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 931C812B3B6; Tue,  4 Mar 2008 11:25:35 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [192.168.0.12] (ras75-4-82-235-58-110.fbx.proxad.net [82.235.58.110])
	by smtps.univ-orleans.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6924E36E5B;
	Tue,  4 Mar 2008 11:25:36 +0100 (CET)
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] different records, same field name?
From: David Teller <David.Teller@univ-orleans.fr>
To: Berke Durak <berke.durak@exalead.com>
Cc: DooMeeR <d@doomeer.com>,
	caml-list caml-list <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>
In-Reply-To: <47CD1BF7.7060100@exalead.com>
References:
	 <OF27A2428D.CC65E3C9-ON85257401.005C4529-85257401.005CAA42@aep.com>
	 <47CC4765.2080309@doomeer.com>  <47CD1BF7.7060100@exalead.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2008 11:25:34 +0100
Message-Id: <1204626334.6530.15.camel@Blefuscu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.12.1 
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam: no; 0.00; univ-orleans:01 0100,:01 berke:01 durak:01 syntax:01 cheers:01 univ-orleans:01 lifo:01 liquidations:98 wrote:01 caml-list:01 define:02 distributed:05 tue:06 thread:06 

On Tue, 2008-03-04 at 10:52 +0100, Berke Durak wrote:
> Here's one thing we could do as part of the OSR.  Define a list of
> "standard" syntax extensions and libraries.
> 
> I would certainly vote for openin to be included by default.

Agreed on both accounts. Do you wish to launch a thread on that
subject ?


Cheers,
 David
-- 
David Teller
 Security of Distributed Systems
  http://www.univ-orleans.fr/lifo/Members/David.Teller
 Angry researcher: French Universities need reforms, but the LRU act brings liquidations.