[wg-camlp4] Request for feedback

Leo White lpw25 at cam.ac.uk
Fri Mar 15 13:53:06 GMT 2013

Gabriel Scherer <gabriel.scherer at gmail.com> writes:

> 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?

I think that is because "let at foo x = ..." doesn't annotate foo with much
information. The expected uses are more like:

    let [@foo (*some information pretending to be an expression*)] x = ...

where obviously the hevier syntax is required.

More information about the wg-camlp4 mailing list