On 11 Dec 2014, at 19:26, Ian Zimmerman <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Wed, 10 Dec 2014 20:52:36 -0600,
> Peter Gammie <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Peter> Me neither. Hide it under a flag? Or are you (and Makarius)
> Peter> suggesting that I hand-roll my own REPL? (I’m not adverse to that
> Peter> either.)
> 
> FWIW, I have hacked Stefan’s SML mode to understand PolyML error messages.

Yes, I should have been clearer: this is not (just) about the emacs sml-mode 
but the generic emacs “compile” machinery. The latter could be educated to 
understand Poly/ML’s warnings and errors, or Poly/ML could conform to some 
“standard”. I was sounding David out about the latter, and also about Poly/ML’s 
REPL.

I saw your emails in the Poly/ML archives and was hoping you’d opine about how 
you interact with the system.

> It is sad that I feel the need to say this in advance, but I won't be
> drawn into any debate on the usefulness or otherwise of "old-fashioned"
> software.

Why not? IMHO if you’re using (S)ML you’ve already taken a substantial position 
in such a debate. :-)

cheers
peter

— 
http://peteg.org/

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

_______________________________________________
polyml mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/polyml

Reply via email to