From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr 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 CE256BC69 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 02:42:00 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ptb-relay02.plus.net (ptb-relay02.plus.net [212.159.14.213]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id l7F0g05w032563 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 02:42:00 +0200 Received: from [80.229.56.224] (helo=beast.local) by ptb-relay02.plus.net with esmtp (Exim) id 1IL6xT-0003gV-Je for caml-list@yquem.inria.fr; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 01:41:59 +0100 From: Jon Harrop Organization: Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Weak hash table for attaching extra data to an object Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 01:33:23 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.7 References: <20070814101535.GA14485@furbychan.cocan.org> <200708142144.15414.jon@ffconsultancy.com> <20070814230940.GB11589@takhisis.invalid> In-Reply-To: <20070814230940.GB11589@takhisis.invalid> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200708150133.23573.jon@ffconsultancy.com> X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 46C24BD8.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail . ensmp . fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; hash:01 zacchiroli:01 0100,:01 expr:01 afaict:01 markus:01 mottl:01 ocaml:01 ocaml:01 frog:98 wrote:01 wrote:01 caml-list:01 precisely:01 data:02 On Wednesday 15 August 2007 00:09:40 Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > On Tue, Aug 14, 2007 at 09:44:15PM +0100, Jon Harrop wrote: > > I think this is an important design choice that people should be aware of > > when they first write the code. If you think the product types inside > > your expr > > Richard's point was precisely about *not* being able to change such a > design choice. There can be a lot of reasons for that, for example (even > though this was not Richard's situation AFAICT) not being the author of > the data structure you want to decorate. Yes. Laterally, the point can be addressed by making library writers aware of the points that I made. I think Markus Mottl once said that all libraries should include phantom types... -- Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. OCaml for Scientists http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/ocaml_for_scientists/?e