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 mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.83]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B10BBC37 for ; Thu, 10 Dec 2009 14:49:43 +0100 (CET) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.47,375,1257116400"; d="scan'208";a="38358923" Received: from peray.inria.fr (HELO localhost) ([128.93.8.98]) by mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 10 Dec 2009 14:49:43 +0100 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: caml-list Subject: Re: [Caml-list] revised syntax for abstract types ? From: Nicolas Pouillard To: Serge Leblanc In-reply-to: <1260446204.22959.298.camel@serge2.localnet> References: <1260446204.22959.298.camel@serge2.localnet> Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2009 14:49:43 +0100 Message-Id: <1260452934-sup-6342@peray> User-Agent: Sup/git Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam: no; 0.00; syntax:01 syntax:01 ocaml:01 2009:98 abstract:01 abstract:01 caml-list:01 revised:02 revised:02 serge:05 types:05 types:05 thu:05 dec:05 nicolas:08 Excerpts from Serge Leblanc's message of Thu Dec 10 12:56:44 +0100 2009: > Hi, the documentation for the revised syntax explain that abstract types > are expressed by : The documentation is too old, abstract types now have the same syntax in revised than in the original OCaml syntax. -- Nicolas Pouillard http://nicolaspouillard.fr