From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <damien.doligez@inria.fr>
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 043D1BB81
	for <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>; Fri, 24 Feb 2006 13:58:27 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [128.93.8.130] (macadam.inria.fr [128.93.8.130])
	by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id k1OCwQf7009518
	for <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>; Fri, 24 Feb 2006 13:58:26 +0100
In-Reply-To: <009b01c638ac$6a57b0e0$1f570b50@mshome.net>
References: <006101c6389e$9bbbc440$1f570b50@mshome.net> <20060223183306.GA17390@localhost> <009b01c638ac$6a57b0e0$1f570b50@mshome.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v746.2)
X-Priority: 3
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; delsp=yes; format=flowed
Message-Id: <16A0DC2D-113B-47DA-BA9B-4F6F04B04CE5@inria.fr>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: Damien Doligez <damien.doligez@inria.fr>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] (int * int) <> int*int ?
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 13:59:01 +0100
To: caml-list <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.746.2)
X-Miltered: at nez-perce with ID 43FF02F2.002 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)!
X-Spam: no; 0.00; damien:01 damien:01 caml-list:01 gava:01 ocaml:01 val:01 val:01 syntax:01 constructors:01 overloading:01 wrote:01 unbound:01 doligez:01 doligez:01 constructor:01 
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 Feb 23, 2006, at 20:07, Fr=E9d=E9ric Gava wrote:

> Morever I think that int*int=3D(int*int) "everywhere" in ML...

This is definitely not true.  Consider the following example:

$ ocaml
         Objective Caml version 3.09.2+dev4 (2006-02-09)

# let int =3D 0;;
val int : int =3D 0
# let t =3D [| 1 |];;
val t : int array =3D [|1|]
# t.(int*int);;
- : int =3D 1
# t.int*int;;
Unbound record field label int
#

This example is very similar to your problem.  The substring "int*int"
appears in your program, but it is not _by_itself_ a subexpression of =20=

your
program, so there is no reason why it should be equivalent to =20
"(int*int)".

As Jacques said, what we have here is an unfortunate choice of syntax =20=

for
the declaration of n-ary constructors, combined with overloading of
constructor applications, to n arguments or to one tuple argument.

-- Damien