Re: [Sml-implementers] Subject: Standard ML

[Dave M. <db...@cs...>]

> From:  "Stefan Monnier" <monnier+lists.smlnj.users/news/@RUM.cs.yale.edu>
> To:    sm...@re...
> Date:  04 Oct 2001 19:30:35 EDT
> Subject: Re: [Sml-implementers] Subject: Standard ML

> >>>>> "Matthias" == Matthias Blume <bl...@re...> writes:
> > Well, that settles that.  Sounds like "Standard ML" is soon to be officiall
> y
> > dead.  Ideas for a new name, anyone?
> 
> SuperML ?
> 
> 	Stefan

"Standard" was a poor choice of adjectives in the first place, so I
for one would be glad to discard it.

However, it would be convenient to keep the "SML" acronym.
Stefan's suggestion satisfies that criterion.  Other choices might
be "Superior", "Select", "Simple", "Saxon-Anglo(?)", ... 
Any others?

Or we might go to NML -- Nonstandard ML, New ML, ...

Or, since no one has a trademark on it as far as I know, why
not simply ML?  I've noticed that here in Caml Land, people often
contrast Caml and "ML".

Dave