From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <weis@pauillac.inria.fr>
X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr
Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr
Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78])
	by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37A93BC29
	for <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>; Wed,  9 Aug 2006 15:48:46 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from pauillac.inria.fr (pauillac.inria.fr [128.93.11.35])
	by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k79Dmjll010653
	for <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>; Wed, 9 Aug 2006 15:48:45 +0200
Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id PAA09594 for <caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr>; Wed, 9 Aug 2006 15:48:45 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from mcr-smtp-002.bulldogdsl.com (smtp.bulldogdsl.com [212.158.248.8])
	by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k79DmiP1010594
	for <caml-list@inria.fr>; Wed, 9 Aug 2006 15:48:44 +0200
Received: by mcr-smtp-002.bulldogdsl.com (Postfix, from userid 1010)
	id 6154A845E86; Wed,  9 Aug 2006 14:48:34 +0100 (BST)
Received: from [192.168.123.191] (host-84-9-233-56.bulldogdsl.com [84.9.233.56])
	by mcr-smtp-002.bulldogdsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1121845E84
	for <caml-list@inria.fr>; Wed,  9 Aug 2006 14:48:33 +0100 (BST)
Message-ID: <44D9E864.4000303@ed.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2006 14:51:32 +0100
From: Jeremy Yallop <jeremy.yallop@ed.ac.uk>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (X11/20060713)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: caml-list@inria.fr
Subject: non-recursive recursive module segfault
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Miltered: at nez-perce with ID 44D9E7BD.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)!
X-Miltered: at nez-perce with ID 44D9E7BC.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)!
X-Spam: no; 0.00; recursive:01 segfault:01 rec:01 sig:01 val:01 struct:01 recursive:01 segfaults:01 rec':01 rec':01 trivial:01 compiler:01 bug:01 ocaml:01 exception:01 
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.3 (2005-04-27) on yquem.inria.fr
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled 
	version=3.0.3

What behaviour should I expect for the following code? :

   module rec M :
   sig
     val m : unit -> unit
   end
     =
   struct
     let h _ _ = ()
     let m = h ()
   end

   let _ = M.m ()

According to the documentation this could trigger the exception 
"Undefined_recursive_module", but instead it segfaults.  If I remove the 
`rec' keyword then it "works", i.e. simply returns unit.

I was rather hoping that M would be treated as a non-recursive module, 
despite the `rec', since it's not actually recursive.  It's easy enough 
to avoid the segmentation fault: eta-expanding m, adding a trivial value 
component to the signature, removing `rec', etc., but I was hoping the 
compiler would help out in this case.

In any case, should the segmentation fault be considered a bug?

This is on OCaml 3.09.2/Linux/x86.

Jeremy.