Re: [Caml-list] partial application warning unreliable?

[skaller <skaller@users.sourceforge.net>]

On Fri, 2005-12-09 at 02:51 +0300, malc wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Dec 2005, Jacques Garrigue wrote:
> 
> <snip>
> >
> > # class cc = object (self)
> >    method f x y = x + y
> >    method g () = self#f 1;
> >  end;;
> > class cc :
> >  object method f : int -> int -> int method g : unit -> int -> int end
> >
> > No warning, for the reason stated above: the semicolon does nothing.
> 
> Here's a strange test case, i was bitten by it recently in a real code:
> 
> <mox.ml>
> let y o =
>    o#moo;
>    1
> 
> let x (o:(<moo : string -> unit>)) =
>    y o
> 
> let _ =
>    print_int (x (object method moo s = print_endline s end));
>    print_newline ()
> </mox.ml>
> 
> # ocaml -warn-error A mox.ml
> 1
> 
> In my case method moo was actually a method that locked a mutex, the
> implications were quite severe.

AHA. In trying to fill out your problem to a real test case
for a bug report .. I think I have discovered the problem!

# class cow = object(self) method moo (s:string)= print_endline s
  end;;
class cow : object method moo : string -> unit end

# let y o = o#moo; 1;;
val y : < moo : 'a; .. > -> int = <fun>

And there we have it .. an uncaught partial application!

The reason is clear .. we don't know the arity of the
function yet -- we don't even know its type.

The type of a statement is currently 'a, which is just 
plain wrong. The correct type is void, however unit
will catch more errors than 'a.

-- 
John Skaller <skaller at users dot sf dot net>
Felix, successor to C++: http://felix.sf.net