I'd prefer to see no language extensions at all, except by agreement among the sml community as a whole.
--lcp On 23 Aug 2012, at 13:02, David Matthews <[email protected]> wrote: > Over the years I've taken quite a strong line against extensions. The > intention is that Poly/ML follows the Definition of Standard ML > (Revised) i.e. ML97. That isn't to say that I couldn't be persuaded > otherwise but I think it would require more than this. _______________________________________________ polyml mailing list [email protected] http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/polyml
