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=1.4 required=5.0 tests=SPF_NEUTRAL autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.105]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9374DBC6B for ; Thu, 8 Nov 2007 21:24:24 +0100 (CET) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgAAAIT/MkeBaB4in2dsb2JhbACPAQEBAQEHBAYJIA X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.21,391,1188770400"; d="scan'208";a="19087098" Received: from mx1.polytechnique.org ([129.104.30.34]) by mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 08 Nov 2007 21:24:24 +0100 Received: from alexandre.pilkiewicz?polytechnique.org (AFontenayssB-152-1-47-194.w83-114.abo.wanadoo.fr [83.114.189.194]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ssl.polytechnique.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6215033180 for ; Thu, 8 Nov 2007 21:24:23 +0100 (CET) From: Alexandre Pilkiewicz To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Smoke Vector Graphics: source code licenses for sale Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2007 21:24:21 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.7 References: <200711041201.10255.jon@ffconsultancy.com> <200711081928.11501.alexandre.pilkiewicz@polytechnique.org> <20071108190903.GB19567@yquem.inria.fr> In-Reply-To: <20071108190903.GB19567@yquem.inria.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200711082124.21175.alexandre.pilkiewicz@polytechnique.org> X-AV-Checked: ClamAV using ClamSMTP at djali.polytechnique.org (Thu Nov 8 21:24:23 2007 +0100 (CET)) X-Org-Mail: alexandre.pilkiewicz.2004@polytechnique.org X-Spam: no; 0.00; maranget:01 unspecified:01 unspecified:01 ocaml:01 ocaml:01 haskell:01 smoke:98 luc:01 luc:01 caml-list:01 argument:02 argument:02 graphics:02 bugs:03 languages:03 Le Thursday 08 November 2007 20:09:03 Luc Maranget, vous avez =E9crit=A0: > > And so many things are just unspecified. I know it's a bad idea, whatev= er > > language you use, to rely on the order of evaluation of the argument of= a > > function, but to say "this order may change one day" is to tell > > industrialists : "if you have some "not so good" programmers, even if y= ou > > make all the test you want on your program to check it works, one day it > > may just stop working because we changed the order or evaluation, or > > worst, a lot of silent bugs can appear". > > I cannot resist to remind you that the order of argument evaluation is > unspecified in C. > > Arguably a bad design, but not sufficient to frighten industry. > > > -- Luc My mistake. This was definitely a bad example. I never realized that the sa= me=20 problem existed in other languages, probably because we use so much more=20 function evaluations in OCaml (and also probably because I program almost=20 only in OCaml :-) ). Sorry for the noise :-\ Do you think it may be possible one day for OCaml to have a normalisation,= =20 like Haskell had in 1998, and if it's allready the case, where can I find=20 it ? =2D-=20 Alexandre Pilkiewicz