Re: [Caml-list] [OSR] Exceptionless error management, take 2

[Jacques Garrigue <garrigue@math.nagoya-u.ac.jp>]

From: David Teller <David.Teller@univ-orleans.fr>
>  As it seems that the first take on exceptionless error management has
> been discarded, I have put together a second candidate. This proposal
> takes into account the discussions from the first candidate, should
> resolve the issues introduced by that first candidate -- and presumably
> open a few other cans of worms somewhere along the way.
> 
>  The draft is available on the cocan wiki [1].
> 
> Cheers,
>  David
> 
> [1]
> http://wiki.cocan.org/osr/exceptionless_error_management/recommendation_candidate_2

I have little to say about the approach itself (it may certainly be
good to know that there are no hidden exceptions.)

However, the comments at the end look just like copied from Vincent
Hanquez's mail.
For me, points 2 and 3 make no sense at all.
Polymorphic variants allow to check exhaustiveness... as long as you
use exhaustive pattern matching (i.e. no wildcard, exactly like for
normal variants.)
And they _cannot_ pollute any namespace, since they define nothing.
The other points are subjective.

Jacques Garrigue