|
Home > Archive > Debian Developers > February 2004 > Bug#235118: ITP: hashtbl-ext -- Camlp4 Hashtbl syntax extension
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Bug#235118: ITP: hashtbl-ext -- Camlp4 Hashtbl syntax extension
|
|
| John Goerzen 2004-02-27, 10:34 am |
| Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
* Package name : hashtbl-ext
Version : 20031006
Upstream Author : Stefano Zacchiroli <zack@cs.unibo.it>
* URL : http://www.bononia.it/~zack/myprograms.en.html
* License : GPL
Description : Camlp4 Hashtbl syntax extension
Camlp4 syntax extension to get more {easy,perlish} usage of Hashtbl
module hash tables.
Binary package name: libhashtbl-ext-ocaml
-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
Architecture: alpha
Kernel: Linux erwin 2.4.25-pre5 #1 Thu Jan 15 18:34:29 CST 2004 alpha
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Stefano Zacchiroli 2004-02-27, 11:34 am |
| On Fri, Feb 27, 2004 at 08:40:50AM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
> Upstream Author : Stefano Zacchiroli <zack@cs.unibo.it>
<snip>
> Camlp4 syntax extension to get more {easy,perlish} usage of Hashtbl
> module hash tables.
Erm, since I'm upstream author of this I would rather prefer to package
it by myself :-) I've never did it since I've no idea of how many people
use this package.
Moreover is really a tiny package (just one camlp4 .ml), do you think
it's worth the effort to package it as a standalone package? Wouldn't it
be better to add is as a debian add-on to the ocaml package or to the
ocaml-tools package? I've no strong preference here ....
Finally please not that this package is almost an hack and there is at
least one bug I'm aware of, there is a syntax clash with functions
applied to records with functional modification, like in the following
code:
type foo_record = { a: int }
let foo _ = () in
let r1 = { a = 10 } in
foo { r1 with a = 5 }
The above code, perfectly valid with the usual ocaml syntax, wont work
with hashtbl_ext syntax extension and should be rewritten as
...
foo ({ r1 with a = 5})
Cheers.
--
Stefano Zacchiroli -*- Computer Science PhD student @ Uny Bologna, Italy
zack@{cs.unibo.it,debian.org,bononia.it} -%- http://www.bononia.it/zack/
If there's any real truth it's that the entire multidimensional infinity
of the Universe is almost certainly being run by a bunch of maniacs. -!-
| |
| Remi Vanicat 2004-02-27, 11:34 am |
| John Goerzen <jgoerzen@complete.org> writes:
> Package: wnpp
> Severity: wishlist
>
> * Package name : hashtbl-ext
> Version : 20031006
> Upstream Author : Stefano Zacchiroli <zack@cs.unibo.it>
> * URL : http://www.bononia.it/~zack/myprograms.en.html
> * License : GPL
> Description : Camlp4 Hashtbl syntax extension
>
> Camlp4 syntax extension to get more {easy,perlish} usage of Hashtbl
> module hash tables.
>
> Binary package name: libhashtbl-ext-ocaml
I didn't know this one. By the way, Stefano is one of the member of the
ocaml debian maintainer effort, and is often seen on the Debian Ocaml
Maint ML (<debian-ocaml-maint@lists.debian.org> ) You should go there
to share our experience with us.
--
Rémi Vanicat
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| John Goerzen 2004-02-27, 11:34 am |
| On Fri, Feb 27, 2004 at 04:37:24PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 27, 2004 at 08:40:50AM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
> <snip>
>
> Erm, since I'm upstream author of this I would rather prefer to package
> it by myself :-) I've never did it since I've no idea of how many people
> use this package.
> Moreover is really a tiny package (just one camlp4 .ml), do you think
> it's worth the effort to package it as a standalone package? Wouldn't it
> be better to add is as a debian add-on to the ocaml package or to the
> ocaml-tools package? I've no strong preference here ....
I think the ocaml package itself is not a good place for it. Perhaps
you'd like to add it to ocaml-tools, or a different package that
combines it with other stuff from your site?
-- John
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Sven Luther 2004-02-27, 11:34 am |
| On Fri, Feb 27, 2004 at 04:37:24PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 27, 2004 at 08:40:50AM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
> <snip>
>
> Erm, since I'm upstream author of this I would rather prefer to package
> it by myself :-) I've never did it since I've no idea of how many people
> use this package.
>
> Moreover is really a tiny package (just one camlp4 .ml), do you think
> it's worth the effort to package it as a standalone package? Wouldn't it
> be better to add is as a debian add-on to the ocaml package or to the
> ocaml-tools package? I've no strong preference here ....
Let's put it in ocaml-tools for now. I don't like the idea of adding it
to the ocaml package, which is mostly a pure upstream ocaml + assorted
bugfixes.
Later, if more camlp4 syntaxe stuff is added, we could have a camlp4-tools
or something such package though.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
|
|
|
|
|