[wg-camlp4] Request for feedback

Alain Frisch alain.frisch at lexifi.com
Fri Mar 15 13:51:26 GMT 2013

> But why do we have a heavier syntax for innocuous stuff, and an easy
> syntax for wild-semantics-change stuff? Would let at foo work as well?

Attributes takes an optional argument, i.e. you can write:

  let[@foo bla] x = ....

so we need some delimeters.  (Maybe we could have a lighter syntax for attributes without arguments.)

In the form "let%foo x = ...", the argument of the extension is "let x = ...".

-- Alain

More information about the wg-camlp4 mailing list