From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <louis.gesbert@ocamlpro.com>
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 28CE47ED11
	for <caml-list@sympa.inria.fr>; Mon,  3 Oct 2016 09:02:32 +0200 (CEST)
Authentication-Results: mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; spf=None smtp.pra=louis.gesbert@ocamlpro.com; spf=None smtp.mailfrom=louis.gesbert@ocamlpro.com; spf=None smtp.helo=postmaster@vps119294.ovh.net
Received-SPF: None (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  louis.gesbert@ocamlpro.com) identity=pra;
  client-ip=37.187.244.36;
  receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="louis.gesbert@ocamlpro.com";
  x-sender="louis.gesbert@ocamlpro.com";
  x-conformance=sidf_compatible
Received-SPF: None (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  louis.gesbert@ocamlpro.com) identity=mailfrom;
  client-ip=37.187.244.36;
  receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="louis.gesbert@ocamlpro.com";
  x-sender="louis.gesbert@ocamlpro.com";
  x-conformance=sidf_compatible
Received-SPF: None (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  postmaster@vps119294.ovh.net) identity=helo;
  client-ip=37.187.244.36;
  receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="louis.gesbert@ocamlpro.com";
  x-sender="postmaster@vps119294.ovh.net";
  x-conformance=sidf_compatible
IronPort-PHdr: =?us-ascii?q?9a23=3ApV2xTh8ol8LCnv9uRHKM819IXTAuvvDOBiVQ1KB9?=
 =?us-ascii?q?1+ocTK2v8tzYMVDF4r011RmSDN+dsa4P0rOP++C4ACpbvsbH6ChDOLV3FDY7yu?=
 =?us-ascii?q?wu1zQ6B8CEDUCpZNXLVAcdWPp4aVl+4nugOlJUEsutL3fbo3m18CJAUk6nbVk9?=
 =?us-ascii?q?Dq3PF4XTl8W60fyps92WOl0QxWn1XbQnJxyzqUDVt9IKqYpkMKc4jBXT5jNtcu?=
 =?us-ascii?q?BdwmdtbXeagx/45c74qJtm+jhZv/Eo38FFWKT+Oa8/SOoLIi4hNjUR49DqrlHs?=
 =?us-ascii?q?QBCF62EAGjESlQdJGE7K4QrwU43tmizxv+95wDOde8bxSOZnCnyZ8653RUqw22?=
 =?us-ascii?q?88PDkj/TSS05QogQ=3D=3D?=
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0C2CwA/AvJX/yT0uyVdHgYMGBgHgwYBA?=
 =?us-ascii?q?QEBAXUTAzUxhSafCot0ghKIIxyGAgIIgg8QAQEBAQEBAQEBAQFdJ4IyBAEVAQS?=
 =?us-ascii?q?CEQEBBCcTTwsYCRUQDwFHBgGIY7wDhjiEVYREY4R7AQSZeIFlhEKMBochhhWMb?=
 =?us-ascii?q?oN+NR+FDjw0hmuBQQEBAQ?=
X-IPAS-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0C2CwA/AvJX/yT0uyVdHgYMGBgHgwYBAQEBAXUTAzUxhSa?=
 =?us-ascii?q?fCot0ghKIIxyGAgIIgg8QAQEBAQEBAQEBAQFdJ4IyBAEVAQSCEQEBBCcTTwsYC?=
 =?us-ascii?q?RUQDwFHBgGIY7wDhjiEVYREY4R7AQSZeIFlhEKMBochhhWMboN+NR+FDjw0hmu?=
 =?us-ascii?q?BQQEBAQ?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.31,288,1473112800"; 
   d="scan'208";a="239115800"
Received: from antislash.info (HELO vps119294.ovh.net) ([37.187.244.36])
  by mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 03 Oct 2016 09:02:31 +0200
From: Louis Gesbert <louis.gesbert@ocamlpro.com>
To: caml-list@inria.fr, Malcolm Matalka <mmatalka@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2016 09:02:25 +0200
Message-ID: <8387589.2ddTWeEJPz@maitake>
In-Reply-To: <86zin96l8z.fsf@gmail.com>
References: <86zin96l8z.fsf@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
X-Validation-by: meta@antislash.info
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] ocp-indent begin/end behaviour?

On jeudi 15 septembre 2016 19:01:00 CEST Malcolm Matalka wrote:
> I have the following code that I'm using ocp-indent to indent:
> 
> let () =
>   match Random.int 10 with
> 
>     | 1 -> begin
> 
>         zoom ();
>         baz ()
>       end
> 
>     | 2 ->
> 
>       ()
> 
> The zoom and baz are indented "double", and I cannot figure out how to
> undo that.  I'd like the begin/end to have no effect on indentation at
> all.  Is this a bug or am I doing something wrong?
> 
> /Malcolm

ocp-indent is all about compromises and trying to keep programs visually 
consistent. Also, it attempts to keep the configuration options to a minimum 
so that their effects can still be easily understood, and styles don't diverge 
too much.

In this case, `zoom (); baz ()` is inside two scopes that can be closed 
individually (`->` and `begin/end`). So, as Goswin pointed out, without that 
extra indentation the `end` would have to be either at the level of the `|` or 
that of `zoom ();`, which isn't totally accurate, and in either case, if you 
were to add `; some more stuff` after `end`, you couldn't get a proper 
indentation without backtracking anymore.

So it's not a bug, but a design choice -- it's impossible to satisfy everyone 
anyway (-- or it would end up like LaTeX). Note that it's designed to play 
well with interactive use + partially manual indent (e.g. if you move `zoom 
();`, `baz ()` will follow)

Best,
Louis Gesbert -- OCamlPro