Re: Better syntax for a Standard ML derivative

"David B. Benson" <dbenson@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes:
> While I am going to consider Haskell-style indentation, for
> long code bodies some other solution is required, so the
> indentation needs to be optional. (Also, some do not like it.)

It's optional in Haskell (you can use { ... ; ... } instead)
and that approach seems reasonable.

If you're going to rework SML syntax, I think it's better to rework
it radically than tweak it here and there.