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=0.6 required=5.0 tests=NO_REAL_NAME autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.82]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 480E1BC6C for ; Fri, 8 Feb 2008 11:52:23 +0100 (CET) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgAAAB/Dq0fAXQInh2dsb2JhbACPQHUBAQEICimbEg X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.25,321,1199660400"; d="scan'208";a="7816665" Received: from concorde.inria.fr ([192.93.2.39]) by mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 08 Feb 2008 11:52:23 +0100 Received: from mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.83]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id m18AqMcO018765 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=OK) for ; Fri, 8 Feb 2008 11:52:23 +0100 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgAAAB/Dq0fUGypBkGdsb2JhbACPQHUBAQEBBwQGBwoIEJsS X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.25,321,1199660400"; d="scan'208";a="7093720" Received: from smtp8-g19.free.fr ([212.27.42.65]) by mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 08 Feb 2008 11:52:22 +0100 Received: from smtp8-g19.free.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp8-g19.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92B0717F50C; Fri, 8 Feb 2008 11:52:22 +0100 (CET) Received: from imp6-g19.free.fr (imp6-g19.free.fr [212.27.42.6]) by smtp8-g19.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 035FD17F572; Fri, 8 Feb 2008 11:52:22 +0100 (CET) Received: by imp6-g19.free.fr (Postfix, from userid 33) id 46CB84465; Fri, 8 Feb 2008 11:52:19 +0100 (CET) Received: from 67.165.100-84.rev.gaoland.net (67.165.100-84.rev.gaoland.net [84.100.165.67]) by imp.free.fr (IMP) with HTTP for ; Fri, 08 Feb 2008 11:52:18 +0100 Message-ID: <1202467938.47ac3462d077a@imp.free.fr> Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2008 11:52:18 +0100 From: rlehy@free.fr To: Vincent Hanquez Cc: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] [OSR] Exceptionless error management, take 2 References: <1202396482.6084.5.camel@Blefuscu> <20080208.001729.233402575.garrigue@math.nagoya-u.ac.jp> <20080208095333.GA582@snarc.org> In-Reply-To: <20080208095333.GA582@snarc.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) 3.2.8 X-Originating-IP: 84.100.165.67 X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 47AC3466.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail . ensmp . fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; variants:01 clashing:01 variants:01 ronan:01 polymorphic:01 polymorphic:01 wrote:01 caml-list:01 variant:02 define:02 garrigue:03 module:03 jacques:03 library:03 identifiers:04 Selon Vincent Hanquez : > On Fri, Feb 08, 2008 at 12:17:29AM +0900, Jacques Garrigue wrote: > > And [polymorphic variants] _cannot_ pollute any namespace, > > since they define nothing. > they "pollute" since the polymorphic variant namespace is flat, and > don't interact with module (on purpose obviously) Could you please expand on this "pollution" and the *practical* problems it causes? I can see the risk of my own identifiers clashing with those of a library, and that finding documentation when the namespace is flat is harder. But none of these seem applicable for polymorphic variants, so I feel like I'm missing something. -- Ronan