From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A3F4BC2F for ; Fri, 26 Nov 2004 04:08:21 +0100 (CET) Received: from pauillac.inria.fr (pauillac.inria.fr [128.93.11.35]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id iAQ38KWt005288 for ; Fri, 26 Nov 2004 04:08:20 +0100 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 EAA10335 for ; Fri, 26 Nov 2004 04:08:20 +0100 (MET) Received: from smtp3.adl2.internode.on.net (smtp3.adl2.internode.on.net [203.16.214.203]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id iAQ38Hrs006143 for ; Fri, 26 Nov 2004 04:08:19 +0100 Received: from [192.168.1.200] (ppp217-171.lns1.syd3.internode.on.net [203.122.217.171]) by smtp3.adl2.internode.on.net (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id iAQ38COU098844; Fri, 26 Nov 2004 13:38:12 +1030 (CST) Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Why doesn't ocamlopt detect a missing ; after failwith statement? From: skaller Reply-To: skaller@users.sourceforge.net To: Jacques Garrigue Cc: warplayer@free.fr, caml-list In-Reply-To: <20041126.094412.30442729.garrigue@math.nagoya-u.ac.jp> References: <20041125204628.GA24215@annexia.org> <005701c4d333$c3bc31e0$19b0e152@warp> <1101427906.9291.107.camel@pelican.wigram> <20041126.094412.30442729.garrigue@math.nagoya-u.ac.jp> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1101438486.9291.138.camel@pelican.wigram> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.2 (1.2.2-4) Date: 26 Nov 2004 14:08:06 +1100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Miltered: at nez-perce with ID 41A69E24.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 41A69E21.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 ocamlopt:01 failwith:01 sourceforge:01 wrote:01 unification:01 extensional:01 polymorphism:01 glebe:01 ...:98 061:98 nsw:01 jacques:01 constraint:01 snail:02 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.0 (2004-09-13) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled version=3.0.0 X-Spam-Level: On Fri, 2004-11-26 at 11:44, Jacques Garrigue wrote: > But by definition 'a unifies with everything, including your void > type, or you get a noncommutative notion of unification... Can you give an example? I presume you mean that the invariant U(t1,t2) == U(t2,t1) would break? [I actually don't implement that constraint in Felix, but it uses extensional polymorphism] -- John Skaller, mailto:skaller@users.sf.net voice: 061-2-9660-0850, snail: PO BOX 401 Glebe NSW 2037 Australia Checkout the Felix programming language http://felix.sf.net