2002-12-15

<whee> I've seen them added through camlp4, though

2002-12-13

<whee> but the bug is fixed in his seperate camlp4 tree. good enough for me
<whee> he apparently doesn't support the camlp4 that is distributed with cvs ocaml. heh
<whee> interesting. I sent the camlp4 developer a bug report and he brought up the political state of camlp4 and ocaml instead of telling me if 1) he knew about it and it's fixed, or 2) he didn't

2002-12-09

<whee> camlp4 is great, I did a couple minor syntax extensions yesterday to learn it
<mattam> hmmm, i've got to finish reading camlp4's tut and manual :)
<whee> camlp4 is actually pretty damn easy to use now that I've tried it
<whee> anyone alive and have experience with camlp4?
<whee> there doesn't appear to be a set of camlp4 libraries that were compiled to native code
<SoreEel> At some point, it illustrates the use of camlp4 with both the top-level and compilation tools.
<SoreEel> whee: Read the camlp4 manual at caml.inria.fr

2002-12-08

<whee> erm, how do I actually use a syntax extension defined with camlp4?
<whee> hrm, I think I'll learn camlp4 tomorrow and add that function composition operator

2002-12-07

<SoreEel> The Camlp4 manual probably has examples.
<whee> well either that or camlp4 decided to do something funky

2002-12-03

<jemfinch> polymorphic variants, classes, polymorphic recursion, camlp4, etc.

2002-11-29

<whee> I think tonight is the night to learn camlp4 and add unicode operators though! heh
<graydon> there is a simple #define-like thing which is shipping with newer versions, but the general camlp4 system is extremely extensible; you can perform any sort of lexing, parsing, syntactic substitution you like.
<graydon> it has camlp4, a very powerful pre-processor

2002-11-21

* RichiH doesn't know what camlp4 is, but ok :)
<whee> it's still ocaml but preprocessed with camlp4
<whee> meh hold on I'll let camlp4 translate it to normal syntax for you

2002-11-19

<MegaWatS> whee: no, but that is what camlp4 is for
<whee> every time someone brings up ocaml syntax (the camlp4 guy for instance), the compiler dismisses it as being 'just syntax'. noone will ever agree on anythin

2002-11-14

<whee> it'd look like you have the ability to have a function that does nd matrices, but it's just camlp4 handling it
<whee> camlp4 would go and create a function that does nothing but create 3d matrices, another that creates nothing but 4d, etc etc
<MegaWatS> so, what do you suppose camlp4 could do about it? it can only change syntax
<whee> probably could pull it off with some camlp4 preprocessing

2002-11-09

<steele> whee: you can use camlp4 for simple grammars

2002-11-06

<whee> finally, camlp4 is back in the makefiles
<whee> there's a Stream module, it's a camlp4 language extension

2002-11-02

<Yurik> you can implement kinda of bf in camlp4 :)))))))
<whee> the camlp4 guy is having some kind of argument with the ocaml team and went and disabled camlp4in the cvs tree
<whee> great. I don't think I can recompile camlp4 to fix it now either
<whee> when camlp4 was taken out of the cvs makefile I went and recompiled ocaml; now I can't use camlp4 because of a version mismatch
<zack> two-face: sure but probably users can benefit more from an external camlp4 if Daniel can have more freedom in its development
<two-face> zack: since users want camlp4 in ocaml, i think he 's going wrong
<zack> two-face: from ocaml 3.07 we probably will have to switch to the camlp4 external repository
<two-face> zack: I've seen that daniel has removed anything related to camlp4 in ocaml makefiles (CVS)
<whee> is there some reason daniel refuses to just maintain camlp4 seperately and sync trees before releases?
<whee> bleh this whole camlp4 discussion on the mailing list is disturbing
<whee> camlp4 definately needs to be distributed with ocaml, it's too powerful to not :|
* whee is just reading the camlp4 comments

2002-11-01

* Yurik_ thinks that camlp4 should be in ocaml
<taw> is this fight over 'camlp4 shipped with ocaml or separately' or what ?
<Yurik_> two-face: bah! camlp4 is great...will it be distributed separately?
<two-face> Yurik_: daniel has removed anything about camlp4 in ocaml makefiles in ocaml CVS
<Yurik_> just via preprocessor (camlp4)
<two-face> daniel has removed anything about camlp4 in ocaml makefiles
<two-face> i've just seen he remove anything about camlp4 in ocaml CVS
<Yurik> camlp4

2002-10-30

<cleverdra> because O'Caml makes it easier to do imperative programming and mix imperative/functional styles; because O'Caml has a more powerful module system; because O'Caml has an object system; because O'Caml has interpret/bytecode/native-code on all (or many, with native-code) platforms; because O'Caml has modifiable syntax through camlp4

2002-10-25

<zack> I'm using almost only camlp4 modules to work on ocaml syntax tree, but anyway ... say ...
<zack> well, I'm going back to work, if karryall_ need help with camlp4, just say my name!, and I can try to help him
<zack> karryall_: I know a bit of camlp4 and, aniway, much more that french ... :-)
<mrvn> camlp4, lablgtk, cvs
<karryall_> two-face: quel truc ? camlp4 ?
<two-face> karryall_: camlp4 non
<karryall_> vous connaissez bien camlp4 ?

2002-10-24

<whee> plus camlp4 itself was written in the revised syntax so it has to be usable heh
<whee> camlp4 pa_sml.cmo pr_r.cmo somefile (you could use pr_o.cmo if you don't want revised output)
<whee> there's a syntax extension bundled with camlp4 that does it lisp style with s-expressions
<whee> camlp4 does syntax extensions and macros and streams and tons of other things
<whee> alternative syntax the camlp4 guy whipped up

2002-10-22

<zack> the only way that come in to my mind is to define a syntax extension via camlp4

2002-10-07

<Dybbuk> Hmmm. camlp4 looks pretty neat. Like Lisp macros, huh?

2002-10-06

<two-face> Subject: [Caml-list] Threats on future of Camlp4
<pnou> Daniel just said what he want to do with camlp4
<pnou> that camlp4 was useless
<pnou> that's what xavier said about camlp4 that is a pity
<two-face> i don't know anything of camlp4 :p
<smkl> it could be made even easier with camlp4 but there is some other data that is needed
<smkl> there is a camlp4 quotation like: <:rfield<a_field>> that expands into: (fun a -> a.a_field), (fun a b -> {a with a_field=b})

2002-10-04

<smkl> you'll have to set up the camlp4 path somehow

2002-09-28

<two-face> nah, camlp4 is in ocaml now
<two-face> camlp4-ioxml then ?
<olczyk> Sorry Camlp4.

2002-09-27

<olczyk> First Camlp4.
<pnou> -pp 'camlp4 pa_sml.cmo'
<pnou> -pp camlp4 pa_sml.cmo

2002-09-20

<thierry> ocamlsql -I /tmp/cameleon-snapshot/report -I +ocamldoc -I +camlp4 -I /tmp/camele

2002-08-28

<two-face> pnou: il faut créer un répertoire camlp4

2002-08-26

<pnou> tu peux toujours faire une extension camlp4 si tu t'en sens le courage

2002-08-25

<pnou> depuis daniel a créé une nouveau répertoire camlp4 à part sur le cvs et refuse de comiter sur celui d'ocaml

2002-08-18

<chat-de-sorciere> D'où l'intérêt de camlp4, mais peut-être faudrait-il un peu rassembler les modifications de chacun.
<pnou> j'ai fait un truc sympa avec camlp4

2002-08-13

<pnou_> tiens à ce propos Daniel de Rauglaudre bosse sur une syntaxe scheme pour camlp4 en ce moment :)

2002-06-28

<Dybbuk> Ok, so the stream stuff, like [< '1; '2 >], needs camlp4, right?

2002-06-27

<TimFreeman> Let's be sure we're talking about the same thing. There's a section called "The Revised syntax" in the camlp4 manual that describes an entirely different syntax for ocaml. I'm not asking whether you use camlp4 in general.
<TimFreeman> Does anyone use the ocaml alternative syntax described in the camlp4 manual?

2002-06-26

<Dybbuk> Yurik: The camlp4 streams stuff...the streams are lazy.
<Dybbuk> Yurik: It looks like camlp4 has an easier way of doing lazy evaluation.
<Yurik> for example, in camlp4 distribution you can find revised syntax for OCaml, SML syntax and Lisp syntax :-))
<Yurik> Dybbuk: camlp4 is a pre-processor-pretty-printer with very good facilities
<Dybbuk> Yurik: Yeah, I don't quite understand what camlp4 is yet...but I have seen a ton of stuff that I look forward to learning.
<Yurik> Dybbuk: OCaml really has interesting feature to play with (like camlp4 and so on)

2002-05-29

<malc> besides i do not use camlp4
<puffin> malc: you could always change it using camlp4 :-)

2002-05-23

<puffin> fortunately camlp4 seems to have quite a few undocumented pieces :-)

2002-04-21

<walters> anyone here used camlp4 to write macros?

2002-03-16

<TimFreeman> So the idea with dynamic linking and camlp4 is to link in the interpreter to do the ifdef's?
<malc> camlp4 addon for CPP like define ifdef ifndef
<malc> > speedy native Camlp4 without constant recompilation to accomodate pa_ifdef

2002-02-25

<malc> conclusion 'camlp4 pa_r.cmo pr_o.cmo moo.ml' and vice versa :)
<malc> camlp4 is bundled with ocaml only since version 3.04, i guess some people havent used it for the reasons of easier acceptance

2002-02-02

<smkl> with camlp4, it is possible to redesign the syntax. camlp4 comes with a revised syntax

2002-01-24

<samx> checked camlp4 ? i believe it has quotations

2002-01-21

<graydon> there's already a sexp camlp4 module, in camlp4/ets/pa_lisp.cmo, I think.
<graydon> basically you have 3 options with camlp4:
<jemfinch> camlp4 always just seemed too hard to learn for me.
<jemfinch> so this interpreter I've written in O'Caml, I could get camlp4 to just translate that into O'Caml?
<graydon> you can teach camlp4 how to transform it directly into ocaml
<graydon> camlp4 lets you make up a notation for whatever problem you're working on. it's like (defmacro...) for ML.
<jemfinch> do you use camlp4?
<graydon> better standard tools. camlp4 in particular :)
<jjl> use the sml camlp4 thing :)

2002-01-19

<jemfinch> no, I definitely think camlp4 is just a workaround around ocaml's...lacking syntax :)
<samx> you could have reprogrammed the syntax with camlp4 :-)

2002-01-07

<Submarine> Or at least they could give a converter (possible with camlp4).
<jemfinch> you've worked with camlp4 -- how hard would it be to "write a new syntax" for O'Caml?
<Submarine> Second problem: with CamlP4, it's very difficult to do take constants to the toplevel.
<jemfinch> so you're doing stuff with camlp4, I assume.

2001-12-21

<graydon_> anyone ever have this problem where an ocamllex lexer doesn't enjoy calling itself, when used as a camlp4 lexer?