We use monads quite a bit, and the lack of a monadic syntax has been a
long-running issue for us at Jane Street.  I'd love to see some kind of
monadic syntax land.  I've seen the proposal, and it seems highly
plausible.  Also, having a special operator (let!) has been proposed as
part of this I believe, and that seems like a good idea too.

y

On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 7:39 AM, Mehdi Dogguy <mehdi@dogguy.org> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I noticed that Alain Frisch tried to add custom let bindings (see r11894
> and r11906) but it was reverted later on (see r11960) because no
> consensus was reached (among OCaml Core team, I guess). AFAIR, I don't
> remember seeing this on the caml-list. I'd personally vote for its
> inclusion as I can see some uses for it. As any syntaxic sugar, it is
> something we can live without but it could make things easier to read or
> to express.
>
> FTR, the proposal is to add the following:
>
>        “let.e0 p = e1 in e2” will be expanded to “e0 e1 (fun p -> e2)”.
>
> I'm not sure which part of the proposal was not agreed on (the syntaxic
> details "let.e0" or the whole proposal). Any input from the core team would
> be appreciated.
>
> What do others think about it?
>
> Regards,
>
> --
> Mehdi Dogguy
>
> --
> Caml-list mailing list.  Subscription management and archives:
> https://sympa-roc.inria.fr/**wws/info/caml-list<https://sympa-roc.inria.fr/wws/info/caml-list>
> Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/**ocaml_beginners<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners>
> Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-**bugs<http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs>
>
>