From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id TAA13053; Wed, 6 Feb 2002 19:45:17 +0100 (MET) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f 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 TAA12504 for ; Wed, 6 Feb 2002 19:45:15 +0100 (MET) Received: from cilantro.cs.wisc.edu (cilantro.cs.wisc.edu [128.105.166.48]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id g16IjET15648 for ; Wed, 6 Feb 2002 19:45:14 +0100 (MET) Received: (from willb@localhost) by cilantro.cs.wisc.edu (8.9.2/8.9.2) id MAA06356 for caml-list@inria.fr; Wed, 6 Feb 2002 12:45:13 -0600 (CST) Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2002 12:45:13 -0600 From: Will Benton To: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: [Caml-list] what is the revised syntax? Message-ID: <20020206124513.B15370@cilantro.cs.wisc.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk All this syntax talk has gotten me curious: is there a web page or document somewhere that details the salient differences between the revised and standard syntaxes? thanks, wb -- Will Benton | "Die richtige Methode der Philosophie wäre eigentlich die: willb@acm.org | Nichts zu sagen, als was sich sagen läßt...." ------------------- Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr