Re: "weird" naming convention for ocamlbuild executables

[Eric Cooper <ecc@cmu.edu>]

> > However, why not use *.opt instead of *.native for some degree of
> > backward compatibility?

If we change away from the foo / foo.opt naming scheme, I'd prefer to
make a "clean break" and adopt the .bytecode/.native approach.  I
always thought the presence of both ocamlopt and ocamlc.opt was quite
confusing (and leads to abominations like ocamlopt.opt).  I'd rather
see ocamlc{,.native,.bytecode} and ocamlopt{,.native,.bytecode}, etc.

I suppose *.opt symlinks could be kept for a while for compatibility,
but I'd rather see them go away.

-- 
Eric Cooper             e c c @ c m u . e d u