From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from discorde.inria.fr (discorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.38]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3CCCBC69 for ; Fri, 3 Aug 2007 23:29:02 +0200 (CEST) Received: from einhorn.in-berlin.de (einhorn.in-berlin.de [192.109.42.8]) by discorde.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id l73LT1Oc005648 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for ; Fri, 3 Aug 2007 23:29:02 +0200 X-Envelope-From: oliver@first.in-berlin.de X-Envelope-To: Received: from einhorn.in-berlin.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by einhorn.in-berlin.de (8.13.6/8.13.6/Debian-1) with ESMTP id l73LT0Oe011124 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Fri, 3 Aug 2007 23:29:01 +0200 Received: (from www-data@localhost) by einhorn.in-berlin.de (8.13.6/8.13.6/Submit) id l73LT0fl011122 for caml-list@inria.fr; Fri, 3 Aug 2007 23:29:00 +0200 X-Authentication-Warning: einhorn.in-berlin.de: www-data set sender to oliver@first.in-berlin.de using -f Received: from dslb-088-073-105-032.pools.arcor-ip.net (dslb-088-073-105-032.pools.arcor-ip.net [88.73.105.32]) by webmail.in-berlin.de (IMP) with HTTP for ; Fri, 3 Aug 2007 23:29:00 +0200 Message-ID: <1186176540.46b39e1c6f460@webmail.in-berlin.de> Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2007 23:29:00 +0200 From: Oliver Bandel To: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Type notation in OO-layer References: <1186175921.46b39bb1508b1@webmail.in-berlin.de> In-Reply-To: <1186175921.46b39bb1508b1@webmail.in-berlin.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) 3.2.6 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang_at_IN-Berlin_e.V. on 192.109.42.8 X-Miltered: at discorde with ID 46B39E1D.002 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail . ensmp . fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; bandel:01 in-berlin:01 notation:01 bandel:01 in-berlin:01 -function:01 oliver:01 oliver:01 caml-list:01 annotation:02 annotation:02 string:02 unit:03 misleading:03 somewhere:06 Zitat von Oliver Bandel : [...] > As it is not a true "unit"-function, we at least should give it a > unit-like type like "message -> string" so that the type-system > make a complete annotation of type?! OK, I had misleading thoughts here: not the method get's the message, the object gets the message. So, the type of the function is OK. But shouldn't the message be somewhere else notated? Or is this thrown out in general, when using OO? I sthere no contradiction, when using such a type annotation, when comparing it to the non-OO stuff? TIA, Oliver