From: Jacques Garrigue <garrigue@math.nagoya-u.ac.jp>
To: lukstafi@gmail.com
Cc: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] (int * int) <> int*int ?
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 11:17:28 +0900 (JST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060224.111728.88698334.garrigue@math.nagoya-u.ac.jp> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4a708d20602231618r4839fe7wa695e9084df8fd40@mail.gmail.com>
From: "Lukasz Stafiniak" <lukstafi@gmail.com>
> > This unfortunate syntax has consequences down to polymorphic variants,
> > which otherwise could be represented more efficiently.
> >
> This is interesting, could you explain it shortly?
The tuple based syntax for constructors is ambiguous: there is no way
to know syntactically whether a constructor takes as argument a tuple
or separate arguments. This is the reason for this whole discussion.
For datatypes, the ambiguity is solved by looking-up the definition.
With polymorphic variants, there is no definition, so one is forced to
use a uniform representation, namely all constructors have either 0 or
1 argument. This means that `A(arg1,arg2) has to be represented
internally as [|`A; [|arg1; arg2|] |].
With a non-ambiguous syntax, like (`A arg1 arg2), it would be possible
to use a more compact internal representation: [|`A; arg1; arg2|].
This is not a big problem, just an historical hiccup.
Jacques
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-02-24 2:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-02-23 17:28 Frédéric Gava
2006-02-23 18:33 ` [Caml-list] " Eric Cooper
2006-02-23 19:03 ` Martin Jambon
2006-02-23 19:07 ` Frédéric Gava
2006-02-23 20:15 ` Brian Hurt
2006-02-23 21:30 ` Frédéric Gava
2006-02-23 21:57 ` Brian Hurt
2006-02-23 22:30 ` Frédéric Gava
2006-02-23 22:50 ` Brian Hurt
2006-02-23 23:07 ` Frédéric Gava
2006-02-24 8:38 ` Alessandro Baretta
2006-02-24 12:59 ` Damien Doligez
2006-02-23 18:33 ` Thomas Fischbacher
2006-02-23 18:56 ` David Brown
2006-02-23 19:24 ` Frédéric Gava
2006-02-23 19:37 ` Frédéric Gava
2006-02-23 19:45 ` Frédéric Gava
2006-02-24 0:01 ` Jacques Garrigue
2006-02-24 0:18 ` Lukasz Stafiniak
2006-02-24 2:17 ` Jacques Garrigue [this message]
2006-02-24 13:07 ` Alain Frisch
2006-02-25 17:42 ` Vincent Balat
2006-02-25 18:30 ` Nicolas Pouillard
2006-02-25 19:09 ` Richard Jones
2006-03-01 12:48 ` Nicolas Pouillard
2006-02-25 23:17 ` Christophe TROESTLER
2006-03-01 13:01 ` Nicolas Pouillard
2006-02-27 11:14 ` camlp4 renovation [was: [Caml-list] (int * int) <> int*int ?] Hendrik Tews
2006-02-24 13:39 ` [Caml-list] (int * int) <> int*int ? Nicolas Cannasse
2006-02-24 14:49 ` Frédéric Gava
2006-02-24 8:27 ` also for tagged records? [Was: Re: [Caml-list] (int * int) <> int*int ?] Sebastian Egner
2006-02-24 14:01 ` Thomas Fischbacher
2006-02-23 20:58 ` [Caml-list] (int * int) <> int*int ? Jon Harrop
2006-02-23 21:36 ` Frédéric Gava
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20060224.111728.88698334.garrigue@math.nagoya-u.ac.jp \
--to=garrigue@math.nagoya-u.ac.jp \
--cc=caml-list@yquem.inria.fr \
--cc=lukstafi@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).