From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C7BEBCAE for ; Tue, 19 Jul 2005 00:15:54 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pauillac.inria.fr (pauillac.inria.fr [128.93.11.35]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id j6IMFrrt004890 for ; Tue, 19 Jul 2005 00:15:53 +0200 Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id AAA05389 for ; Tue, 19 Jul 2005 00:15:53 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from smtp113.sbc.mail.mud.yahoo.com (smtp113.sbc.mail.mud.yahoo.com [68.142.198.212]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with SMTP id j6IMFqDx004501 for ; Tue, 19 Jul 2005 00:15:52 +0200 Received: (qmail 27655 invoked from network); 18 Jul 2005 22:15:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.1.100?) (rftp@pacbell.net@63.194.18.166 with plain) by smtp113.sbc.mail.mud.yahoo.com with SMTP; 18 Jul 2005 22:15:50 -0000 Message-ID: <42DC2A2B.1050602@rftp.com> Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2005 15:16:11 -0700 From: Robert Roessler Organization: Robert's High-performance Software User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.8) Gecko/20050511 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Caml-list Subject: "lnot" missing from documented keywords list Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Miltered: at nez-perce with ID 42DC2A19.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 42DC2A18.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; ocaml:01 subsection:01 oversight:01 ...:98 lexical:01 logical:01 conventions:02 missing:06 manual:07 documented:10 robert:11 robert:11 operators:11 www:85 noticed:15 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 (2004-11-16) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled version=3.0.2 X-Spam-Level: I just noticed this when my OCaml syntax-colorer failed to render lnot as a keyword... :) So I checked the manual section (6.1 "Lexical conventions", subsection "Keywords") that served as the reference for said syntax-colorer and noticed that lnot is not there. Since the other "bitwise" logical operators are listed as keywords, I assume this is an oversight? Robert Roessler roessler@rftp.com http://www.rftp.com