From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id QAA25543; Mon, 26 Apr 2004 16:27:29 +0200 (MET DST) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id QAA25204 for ; Mon, 26 Apr 2004 16:27:27 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from postfix3-1.free.fr (postfix3-1.free.fr [213.228.0.44]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i3QERQYM025357 for ; Mon, 26 Apr 2004 16:27:27 +0200 Received: from warp (lns-th2-5f-81-56-197-80.adsl.proxad.net [81.56.197.80]) by postfix3-1.free.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id 0C7A5C4437; Mon, 26 Apr 2004 16:27:26 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <016301c42b9a$7a61bc40$ef01a8c0@warp> From: "Nicolas Cannasse" To: , "Jacques GARRIGUE" Cc: References: <20040425.175623.71081314.yoriyuki@mbg.ocn.ne.jp><00cb01c42afd$7fc1b430$19b0e152@warp><20040426.221606.71081508.yoriyuki@mbg.ocn.ne.jp> <20040426.225318.68533471.garrigue@kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp> Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Re: Common IO structure Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2004 16:26:34 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1409 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409 X-Miltered: at concorde by Joe's j-chkmail ("http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr")! X-Loop: caml-list@inria.fr X-Spam: no; 0.00; cannasse:01 warplayer:01 caml-list:01 subtyping:01 cannasse:01 ocaml:01 equality:01 nicolas:01 nicolas:01 native:02 objects:02 comparison:02 interface:03 library:03 library:03 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk > > What I want is more than that. I want that we agree some minimal set > > of methods for IO channles, and agree to accept such an IO channel as > > an argument for our library functions, or provide a converter to a > > native IO channel of the library. [...] > All this seems reasonable. > Note that Format also uses [spaces] and [newline], but there are > reasonable defaults for them. > > This also emphasizes one of the advantages of objects: since their > types can be compared for equality, several libraries can use the same > type without requiring a common header (that is, if everybody agrees > on the interface, as you suggest). Is there any chance of getting the same behavior with records ? Records are currently module-bounded, if Ocaml was enabling structural comparison (even without subtyping) it would be very useful. Best Regards, Nicolas Cannasse ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners