From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 Received: from mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.83]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54B37BBC1 for ; Fri, 11 Apr 2008 02:14:40 +0200 (CEST) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApoEAJ9K/kfAXQIm/2dsb2JhbACsEQ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.25,638,1199660400"; d="scan'208";a="9451850" Received: from discorde.inria.fr ([192.93.2.38]) by mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 11 Apr 2008 02:14:40 +0200 Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104]) by discorde.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id m3B0Ed1w017966 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=OK) for ; Fri, 11 Apr 2008 02:14:40 +0200 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AoIAAMFK/kfVpUAUjmdsb2JhbACRTwEBAQEJAwsHFJoM X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.25,638,1199660400"; d="scan'208";a="11324000" Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]) by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with SMTP; 11 Apr 2008 02:14:25 +0200 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 11 Apr 2008 00:14:24 -0000 Received: from X8aaf.x.pppool.de (EHLO noname) [89.59.138.175] by mail.gmx.net (mp039) with SMTP; 11 Apr 2008 02:14:24 +0200 X-Authenticated: #20477425 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX19HcTkIvzxHPaTwobVFVbc1MOEHsPE5NQJX3zQpVR B2PSvoa2Pmf0WP From: Micha To: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] break and continue for OCaml Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2008 02:14:38 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.7 References: <5b0248170804091859s75c3f725s2db53f48fba6735c@mail.gmail.com> <20080410203536.GA23529@stratocaster.home> In-Reply-To: <20080410203536.GA23529@stratocaster.home> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200804110214.38570.micha-1@fantasymail.de> X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-Miltered: at discorde with ID 47FEAD6F.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail . ensmp . fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; ocaml:01 ocaml:01 bool:01 workarounds:01 cleanest:98 wrote:01 exception:01 caml-list:01 exceptions:01 expressive:01 imperative:01 imperative:01 functional:02 functional:02 refs:04 On Thursday 10 April 2008 22:35:36 Eric Cooper wrote: > It adds more imperative baggage to the language, good thing. OCaml advertises the imperative paradigm it supports, so it should support it right. > going against its > "mostly functional" style. And it doesn't add any expressive power, > since you can easily use exceptions, or bool refs as in Pascal, to > achieve the same effect. I'm interessted in the cleanest way to solve a problem, whether it's functional or imperative or oo in the end doesn't matter. And replacing a simple thing with myriads of exception code and workarounds is not my unterstanding of "easily useable". But that discussion is academic, nothing will evolve here, Michael