From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id OAA17845; Thu, 22 Mar 2001 14:10:21 +0100 (MET)
X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f
Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id OAA17638 for <caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr>; Thu, 22 Mar 2001 14:10:20 +0100 (MET)
Received: from dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr (dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr [130.79.6.1])
	by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f2MDAJT08308
	for <caml-list@inria.fr>; Thu, 22 Mar 2001 14:10:19 +0100 (MET)
Received: from lambda.u-strasbg.fr (lambda.u-strasbg.fr [130.79.90.63])
	by dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA00325;
	Thu, 22 Mar 2001 14:09:58 +0100
Received: from luther by lambda.u-strasbg.fr with local (Exim 3.22 #1 (Debian))
	id 14g4r4-0007UR-00; Thu, 22 Mar 2001 14:10:18 +0100
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2001 14:10:18 +0100
To: Alex Baretta <alex@baretta.com>
Cc: "caml-list@inria.fr" <caml-list@inria.fr>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Records
Message-ID: <20010322141018.A27738@lambda.u-strasbg.fr>
References: <3AB9F13C.1B77C08@baretta.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.15i
In-Reply-To: <3AB9F13C.1B77C08@baretta.com>; from alex@baretta.com on Thu, Mar 22, 2001 at 01:34:04PM +0100
From: Sven LUTHER <luther@dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr>
Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Mar 22, 2001 at 01:34:04PM +0100, Alex Baretta wrote:
> Basically I'm trying to define two record type as sharing some
> field names. I have tried twice, apparently in the same way, and
> obtained two different error messages, which seem to contradict
> one another. Could anyone explain to me what is happening here?
> 
> 
>         Objective Caml version 3.00
> 
> # type rec1 = { field1 : int }
>   type rec2 = { field1 : int ; field2 : int };; <--- Here I define
> my two record types
> type rec1 = { field1 : int; } 
> type rec2 = { field1 : int; field2 : int; } 
> # { field1 = 1 };; <--- This is supposed to be a correct rec1

no, it is a rec2 record, since field1 was lastly defined for rec2.

One workaround would be :

module Rec1 = struct
  type t = {field1 : int}
end
module Rec2 = struct
  type t = { field1 : int; field2 : int; } 
end

Then you can do :

{Rec1.field1 = 1} : Rec1.t

or 

{Rec2.field1 = 1; Rec2.field2 = 2} : Rec2.t

If you are interrestedin more such things, i remember a discution about such
things some time ago on this list, please look at the mailing list archive for
more details.

Friendly,

Sven Luther
-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr.  Archives: http://caml.inria.fr