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 4DA9A7EE51 for ; Sat, 25 May 2013 07:14:02 +0200 (CEST) Received-SPF: None (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of wojciech.meyer@gmail.com) identity=pra; client-ip=209.85.212.174; receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="wojciech.meyer@gmail.com"; x-sender="wojciech.meyer@gmail.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: Pass (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: domain of wojciech.meyer@gmail.com designates 209.85.212.174 as permitted sender) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=209.85.212.174; receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="wojciech.meyer@gmail.com"; x-sender="wojciech.meyer@gmail.com"; 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-wi0-f174.google.com) identity=helo; client-ip=209.85.212.174; receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="wojciech.meyer@gmail.com"; x-sender="postmaster@mail-wi0-f174.google.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AiYCAIdHoFHRVdSuk2dsb2JhbABaxW6BBBYOAQEBAQcLCwkUBCSCIwEBBAFAARsdAQMBCwYFCw0JJQ8BBA8RAQUBIhOHegEDCQYEnAWMP4J9hEIKGScNWIgMAQUMjxEHg1QDlzuPWz+ENg X-IPAS-Result: AiYCAIdHoFHRVdSuk2dsb2JhbABaxW6BBBYOAQEBAQcLCwkUBCSCIwEBBAFAARsdAQMBCwYFCw0JJQ8BBA8RAQUBIhOHegEDCQYEnAWMP4J9hEIKGScNWIgMAQUMjxEHg1QDlzuPWz+ENg X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.87,739,1363129200"; d="scan'208";a="18925052" Received: from mail-wi0-f174.google.com ([209.85.212.174]) by mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-SHA; 25 May 2013 07:14:01 +0200 Received: by mail-wi0-f174.google.com with SMTP id c10so258704wiw.7 for ; Fri, 24 May 2013 22:14:01 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version:content-type; bh=OgOHKT86pgmMvHtqYGaGZK8sQPrWdHCf/RqBySNT17U=; b=eOFR3Krtqa9ZReaTQhM+U5Su1K8y03DxMfLv2Jkmx2Zgi8D6wf/5ehZYOL1tWJ4La1 M2eRCXRE4tS49/ewYBaE8HO5WDGL/p3C1rNhSQmAC5sK6Ol02I87123xeh6rFFk3OPxz v+4zqAsOG7xuO5NgSEVhJdgIXe5w1+Ia25U0D6adrd2mJvC4S9/tEhFUU/zCw4wG6fLU m32+sdCj8Nq8byMwc7mWVLwKpNTsKykKEVVUlISg35xqb5gw0QyHd1CzpPAufY8wFbMo m7phSSvjhVntVH/B3okxV7PNASbhiNdzlhTHoASEXOcchw70zlG380ovOe4QSC2Siwol S+kg== X-Received: by 10.180.11.176 with SMTP id r16mr1315103wib.58.1369458841542; Fri, 24 May 2013 22:14:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from spec-desktop.danmey.org (cpc2-cmbg12-0-0-cust796.5-4.cable.virginmedia.com. [86.9.203.29]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id fz8sm2907604wib.2.2013.05.24.22.13.59 for (version=TLSv1.1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 24 May 2013 22:14:00 -0700 (PDT) From: Wojciech Meyer To: oliver Cc: Siraaj Khandkar , Arnaud Spiwack , OCaML Mailing List References: <20130523235355.GI6510@siouxsie> <20130524233015.GE1923@siouxsie> <37A1A2D3-5993-4675-9937-ED3965793D1D@khandkar.net> <20130525004045.GH1923@siouxsie> Date: Sat, 25 May 2013 06:14:11 +0100 In-Reply-To: <20130525004045.GH1923@siouxsie> (oliver@first.in-berlin.de's message of "Sat, 25 May 2013 02:40:45 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Subject: Re: [Caml-list] OCaml's variables Dear Oliver, Well, the variable does not mean that the value can vary over the time, but rather that it means that it and can be defined over the set of (possibly) infinite different values. So the term variable is fully valid and justified. oliver writes: > On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 07:53:33PM -0400, Siraaj Khandkar wrote: >> >> On May 24, 2013, at 7:30 PM, oliver wrote: >> >> > On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 11:01:39AM +0200, Arnaud Spiwack wrote: >> >> Why were you astounded? This is a perfectly legitimate/correct >> >> use of the >> >> word "variable". >> > [...] >> > >> > >> > Do you think so? >> > >> > I have thought about making the sentence better, but did not found >> > a better sentence in short time. >> > >> > But name-value-binding is the term that is used in functional languages. >> > I wonder why the term "variable" pops up there. >> > And even I understood the sentence, I'm not sure if this might >> > create confusion >> > to some readers, because the term "variable" is normally not used >> > for functional languages. >> > >> > People new to FP will be said, there are no "variables", and then >> > they maybe >> > will be irritated, if they find that term in a reference-manual. >> > >> > Do you see what I mean? >> >> If you think of functions as equations, non-constant values are variables. > [...] > > Where do the non-constant values come from? > I don't see there non-constant values. > > Even a referemce, where the value is mutable, is represented > as a name-binding to the reference (container). > But in the chapter on page 136 it's about recursive values. > > That does not mean the values are mutable. > > So I wonder, why the term variables might be ok there. > > Why is on the one hand emphasized, that there are name-value bindings, > on the other hands variables are the right term? > > Or am I too picky? > Or has my mind be infected at the time > when I looked at Haskell and it's pureness? > > > Ciao, > Oliver -- Wojciech