Re: [Caml-list] Static exception analysis or alternative to using exceptions

Jane Street's Core seems to prefer options to exceptions On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 5:10 PM, Hans Ole Rafaelsen wrote: > > > On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 7:30 PM, Dario Teixeira > wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> > What experience does people have to using alternatives to exceptions, >> > such as option types or e

[Caml-list] Re: new emacs tuareg mode release

Hi, Tuareg 2.0.1 is now available from . The main difference is a skip-syntax bug fix. The sources are also available via svn from . -- Sam Steingold __

Re: [Caml-list] Static exception analysis or alternative to using exceptions

On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 7:30 PM, Dario Teixeira wrote: > Hi, > > > What experience does people have to using alternatives to exceptions, > > such as option types or exception monads? Does use of third part > > libraries that still throws exceptions make such approaches hard to use? > > Performance

Re: [Caml-list] Static exception analysis or alternative to using exceptions

Hi, > What experience does people have to using alternatives to exceptions, > such as option types or exception monads? Does use of third part > libraries that still throws exceptions make such approaches hard to use? > Performance wise it seems to be comparable to catching exceptions or > matchin

Re: [Caml-list] New emacs tuareg mode

On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 06:01:39PM +0200, Christophe TROESTLER wrote: > > Why don't you simply make the default according to OCaml's programming > > guidelines [1] ? > > I am in favor of that (it was suggested by others too > https://forge.ocamlcore.org/tracker/?func=detail&atid=258&aid=646&group_

[Caml-list] Static exception analysis or alternative to using exceptions

Hi, when running server software, it is quite frustrating when the program crashes due to an uncaught exception. I see there was some attempts on doing static analysis of the exception flow in programs around 10 years ago (such as ttp://pauillac.inria.fr/caml/ocamlexc/ocamlexc.htm), but they did n

Re: [Caml-list] New emacs tuareg mode

On Wed, 26 May 2010 17:36:20 +0200, Daniel Bünzli wrote: > > > Concerning the tuareg mode, the current default is to have "let > > ... in" indented like > > > >  let v = e1 in > >    e2 > > > > instead of > > > >  let v = e1 in > >  e2 > > Why don't you simply make the default according to OCaml'

Re: [Caml-list] New emacs tuareg mode

> Concerning the tuareg mode, the current default is to have "let > ... in" indented like > >  let v = e1 in >    e2 > > instead of > >  let v = e1 in >  e2 Why don't you simply make the default according to OCaml's programming guidelines [1] ? Best, Daniel [1] http://caml.inria.fr/resources/do

[Caml-list] New emacs tuareg mode

Hi, Concerning the tuareg mode, the current default is to have "let ... in" indented like let v = e1 in e2 instead of let v = e1 in e2 -- for which you have to use (setq tuareg-in-indent 0). We would like not to bother people by changing the default but, on the other hand, I have ye

Re: [Caml-list] new emacs tuareg mode release

On 26/05/2010 16:01, Christophe TROESTLER wrote: > On Wed, 26 May 2010 15:33:13 +0200, Mehdi Dogguy wrote: >> >> * in tuareg-mode 2.0, "let" and "open" statements (and some others) >> are bold and blue. I found that change quite surprising. It keeps my >> eyes clipped on them. They contrast too mu

Re: [Caml-list] new emacs tuareg mode release

On Wed, 26 May 2010 15:33:13 +0200, Mehdi Dogguy wrote: > > * in tuareg-mode 2.0, "let" and "open" statements (and some others) are > bold and blue. I found that change quite surprising. It keeps my eyes > clipped on them. They contrast too much with the other colors used. That is one t

Re: [Caml-list] new emacs tuareg mode release

On 5/26/10, Stéphane Glondu wrote: > (skip-syntax-backward "\s-") > Debugger entered--Lisp error: (error "Invalid modifier in string") I see. Thanks. I will fix this and make tuareg 2.0.1 available soon. -- Sam Steingold ___

Re: [Caml-list] new emacs tuareg mode release

On 26/05/2010 12:02, Tom Hutchinson wrote: > I would be most interested to hear answers to this e-mail. > Me too. It would be nice if tuareg's upstream could summarize some points to show the difference. That would help! > I too have wondered about the differences between tuareg mode and caml >

Re: [Caml-list] new emacs tuareg mode release

From: Eliot Handelman > Tom Hutchinson wrote: >> I would be most interested to hear answers to this e-mail. >> >> I too have wondered about the differences between tuareg mode and caml >> mode. >> > One of the major differences I found (emacs 22.3.1) were persistent > screwups involving comment

Re: [Caml-list] new emacs tuareg mode release

Tom Hutchinson wrote: I would be most interested to hear answers to this e-mail. I too have wondered about the differences between tuareg mode and caml mode. One of the major differences I found (emacs 22.3.1) were persistent screwups involving comments. For example font-lock didn't work on

Re: [Caml-list] new emacs tuareg mode release

I would be most interested to hear answers to this e-mail. I too have wondered about the differences between tuareg mode and caml mode. I noticed that key bindings are different and formatting is handled a little differently. I have never seen a good comparison between the two though. Or why tu