From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA416BCAC for ; Mon, 16 May 2005 02:15:57 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pih-relay06.plus.net (pih-relay06.plus.net [212.159.14.133]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id j4G0FvNO006828 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 16 May 2005 02:15:57 +0200 Received: from [80.229.56.224] (helo=chetara) by pih-relay06.plus.net with esmtp (Exim) id 1DXTH2-00011n-Tf for caml-list@yquem.inria.fr; Mon, 16 May 2005 01:15:57 +0100 From: Jon Harrop Organization: Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] A nastier example Date: Mon, 16 May 2005 01:15:34 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.7.1 References: <200505142009.29177.jon@ffconsultancy.com> <20050515172448.GA1712@three-tuns.net> In-Reply-To: <20050515172448.GA1712@three-tuns.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200505160115.34416.jon@ffconsultancy.com> X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 4287E63D.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 shinwell:01 ocamlc:01 bug:01 ocaml:01 %20:98 %20:98 frog:98 wrote:01 wrote:01 functions:01 bin:01 caml:02 caml-bugs:02 objective:02 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 (2004-11-16) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled version=3.0.2 X-Spam-Level: On Sunday 15 May 2005 18:24, Mark Shinwell wrote: > On Sat, May 14, 2005 at 08:09:28PM +0100, Jon Harrop wrote: > > Does code ever work differently in the top-level than when compiled (with > > ocamlc)? > > Yes. See for example "Reply 2" of: > > http://pauillac.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs/not%20a%20bug?id=3591;page=64;user=g >uest Very interesting. In summary, is it fair to say that Marshall has problems with functions when used in the top-level but not with ocamlc- and ocamlopt- compiled code? Thanks for the link. -- Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. Objective CAML for Scientists http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/ocaml_for_scientists