From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: (from weis@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id PAA26250 for caml-redistribution; Mon, 30 Aug 1999 15:49:17 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id VAA04049 for <caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr>; Sat, 28 Aug 1999 21:52:50 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from sarg.Ryerson.CA (sarg.Ryerson.CA [141.117.18.117])
	by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA15349
	for <caml-list@inria.fr>; Sat, 28 Aug 1999 21:52:48 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from sarg.Ryerson.CA (dmason@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by sarg.Ryerson.CA (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA18613;
	Sat, 28 Aug 1999 15:51:42 -0400
Message-Id: <199908281951.PAA18613@sarg.Ryerson.CA>
To: Andreas Rossberg <rossberg@ps.uni-sb.de>
cc: OCAML <caml-list@inria.fr>, John Skaller <skaller@maxtal.com.au>
Subject: Re: convincing management to switch to Ocaml 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 27 Aug 1999 12:00:34 +0200."
             <37C661C2.D374D8F9@ps.uni-sb.de> 
Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.108)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Date: Sat, 28 Aug 1999 15:51:42 -0400
From: Dave Mason <dmason@sarg.Ryerson.CA>
Sender: weis

>>>>> On Fri, 27 Aug 1999 12:00:34 +0200, Andreas Rossberg <rossberg@ps.uni-sb.de> said:

>[many things I agree with!]

> A document defining the language more formally than the user manual
> would definitely be a good thing. If a standard is needed then one
> has to stick to Standard ML for now, I'm afraid.

Would it really be beyond a Master's student working under Xavier (or
other CAML guru) to translate the SML formal spec into a CAML formal
spec?  Or at least a PhD student.

I think it would be a Very Good Thing!  (And would make the semantic
differences between the languages very explicit.)

../Dave