From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.83]) by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CBE287EEEF for ; Mon, 22 Jun 2015 19:18:53 +0200 (CEST) Received-SPF: None (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of edwin+ml-ocaml@etorok.net) identity=pra; client-ip=62.210.252.135; receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="edwin+ml-ocaml@etorok.net"; x-sender="edwin+ml-ocaml@etorok.net"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: Pass (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: domain of edwin+ml-ocaml@etorok.net designates 62.210.252.135 as permitted sender) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=62.210.252.135; receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="edwin+ml-ocaml@etorok.net"; x-sender="edwin+ml-ocaml@etorok.net"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible; x-record-type="v=spf1" Received-SPF: None (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of postmaster@mail.etorok.net) identity=helo; client-ip=62.210.252.135; receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="edwin+ml-ocaml@etorok.net"; x-sender="postmaster@mail.etorok.net"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0CkCgAdQ4hV/4f80j5cgxCBM8VzAoE6TAEBAQEBAYELQQWDXQEBBEAtCwIBDgsYCRMDDwkDAgECAUUTCAKIL7NohVqRUQEGikOBAoUNFoQVjHyHBotOmDEmgUmCMzsxgkgBAQE X-IPAS-Result: A0CkCgAdQ4hV/4f80j5cgxCBM8VzAoE6TAEBAQEBAYELQQWDXQEBBEAtCwIBDgsYCRMDDwkDAgECAUUTCAKIL7NohVqRUQEGikOBAoUNFoQVjHyHBotOmDEmgUmCMzsxgkgBAQE X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.13,660,1427752800"; d="scan'208";a="166694670" Received: from mail.etorok.net ([62.210.252.135]) by mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 22 Jun 2015 19:18:48 +0200 Received: by mail.etorok.net (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id 708229c9 for ; Mon, 22 Jun 2015 17:18:47 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple; d=etorok.net; h=message-id :date:from:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=ml; bh=q2B2CSiHy9awfj iO7hULPwTHAcg=; b=l3WqaOxGAdcnQDnDb1yZLosVmoe2UO1+WvgWsRcgwmZble Sk+apoCAeFaygGaEq7iRCThTCCeOIOANTGCKGAxXveyE5F2NIrn5dMggcuBF+fE1 7CTfxeDtq2H/ujwDGaXey0TLYF3AcT8DlkSp9in43otaZafG20qxvEhZfP7UQ= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=simple; d=etorok.net; h=message-id :date:from:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=ml; b=Ht70U68E O8T0BnqepcJ0sWYxiZ0G/y8D1dVa73juKotbWCxxGDIa3cV3gUl7R8M2jgvn9H+z YMRBnJASdp3iNnf1R44fXKs0k4WJTt2lp8XedmB8c56WjGjszl9+RAlk3mCBsawd y8r/2ua9MvEPqruosn93bYWjCgQyte7z56c= Received: by mail.etorok.net (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPSA id e138c310 TLS version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO for ; Mon, 22 Jun 2015 17:18:47 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <55884376.2070108@etorok.net> Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2015 20:18:46 +0300 From: =?ISO-8859-15?Q?T=F6r=F6k_Edwin?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/31.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: caml-list@inria.fr References: <1434982765.31996.19.camel@e130.lan.sumadev.de> <1434990659.31996.30.camel@e130.lan.sumadev.de> In-Reply-To: <1434990659.31996.30.camel@e130.lan.sumadev.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Caml-list] use of ";;" when teaching Ocaml On 06/22/2015 07:30 PM, Gerd Stolpmann wrote: > Am Montag, den 22.06.2015, 17:07 +0100 schrieb Mark Shinwell: >> I've heard the argument of Gerd from various people on many occasions. >> Personally, I don't buy it; I think the situation where the error >> message is deficient doesn't happen very often, whereas ";;" is >> syntactic clutter that I have to see every day (and would rather not >> see). > > Note that I personally normally don't use ;; because I am very aware of > the problem and fluent enough in the OCaml syntax to help myself. I was > mentioning this point because beginners are not fluent, and they will > run into the problem of getting syntax errors where everything looks > alright. > [...] > As a side note, the situation would be different if the compiler emitted > warnings about obviously wrong indentation, because the information > where the writer thinks that a new definition begins is also already > included in the indentation. Although ;; was useful to me while learning OCaml, as a debugging tool for syntax errors [1], nowadays editor support is much better (ocp-indent, ocamlmerlin) and you usually see the misplaced ; immediately (or after reindenting the code if you made modifications). [1] tried the revised syntax route too for a while, but since most material and examples on OCaml are about the original syntax it was better to learn just that instead of constantly switching between the two Best regards, --Edwin