Talk:Caml

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Requested move

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was move. -- Kjkolb 05:17, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Categorical Abstract Machine Language → Caml – No longer an acronym. Should get an otheruses or similar template referring to CAML. Qwertyus 23:53, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Survey

Add "* Support" or "* Oppose" followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~

  • Support Qwertyus 23:53, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion

Add any additional comments

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Does one really need a reference to claim that a function is more easily expressed as a function? [in a functional form]

[edit] Caml vs OCaml

I do not know Caml or OCaml so this is a request for clarification. Should the Caml page talk about OCaml? For example, the statement "...it is easy to create and pass around functions in OCaml programs." does not explicitly say if the same is true from Caml without object extensions. Jaimico 09:58, 4 June 2007 (UTC)