[wg-camlp4] A new branch to experiment with extension points
Alain Frisch
alain.frisch at lexifi.com
Fri Mar 1 08:34:38 GMT 2013
On 03/01/2013 05:54 AM, Yaron Minsky wrote:
> Is there any hope of keeping the "with" syntax for type definitions
> that type-conv uses? There's quite a bit of code that depends on it,
> and there seems at least some utility in keeping it.
There will be a need for attributes on individual type declarations (not
only structure items, since a set of mutually recursive declarations in
a single structure item), and "with" seems quite good. However, I
don't believe that it will be possible to find a syntax which will allow
reusing existing code based on type-conv without any change. Leo
suggested that existing Camlp4 extensions could be turned into mapper
from "old syntax" (the one they used to interpret) to the new one (based
on attributes/extension nodes, to be interpreted by a -ppx mapper).
This could help in the migration (at least as a way to document what's
to be done).
-- Alain
More information about the wg-camlp4
mailing list