From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr 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 E937ABB81 for ; Sat, 12 Nov 2005 15:45:55 +0100 (CET) Received: from ash25e.internode.on.net (ash25e.internode.on.net [203.16.214.182]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id jACEjrmC030312 for ; Sat, 12 Nov 2005 15:45:55 +0100 Received: from rosella (ppp7-104.lns1.syd7.internode.on.net [59.167.7.104]) by ash25e.internode.on.net (8.12.9/8.12.6) with ESMTP id jACEjl3G014042; Sun, 13 Nov 2005 01:15:48 +1030 (CST) (envelope-from skaller@users.sourceforge.net) Subject: Re: [Caml-list] strange behavior with record type definition From: skaller To: Michael Wohlwend Cc: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr In-Reply-To: <200511121515.18429.micha-1@fantasymail.de> References: <43752259.80800@aist.enst.fr> <4375DDFC.9060802@motion-twin.com> <1131799890.18524.14.camel@rosella> <200511121515.18429.micha-1@fantasymail.de> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 01:45:46 +1100 Message-Id: <1131806746.22931.1.camel@rosella> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.4.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Miltered: at nez-perce with ID 43760022.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 syntax:01 wrote:01 wrote:01 sourceforge:01 expression:01 exists:02 problem:05 quite:06 looks:07 strange:07 definition:07 michael:07 john:08 2005:91 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.3 (2005-04-27) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled version=3.0.3 On Sat, 2005-11-12 at 15:15 +0100, Michael Wohlwend wrote: > On Saturday 12 November 2005 13:51, skaller wrote: > > > > So that the type of an expression: > > > > > > > > { x = 1; y = 2 } > > > > > > > > can be determined. > > I would have no problem to write in these situations Type1.{ x = 1 } or > Type2.{x = 2} , I think there exists camlp4 program for this. This looks quite a nice solution to me (though I prefer builtin syntax not camlp4). Anyone see any problems with it? -- John Skaller Felix, successor to C++: http://felix.sf.net