From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.83])
	by walapai.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id p2UCdRcR015574
	for <caml-list@sympa-roc.inria.fr>; Wed, 30 Mar 2011 14:39:27 +0200
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AosFAFcjk03UTWUIkGdsb2JhbACERoJZkTGNABQBAQEBCQkNBxQEIaxBgl4BjjwFgSeDTHeQUw
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.63,268,1299452400"; 
   d="scan'208";a="95388868"
Received: from mx4.wp.pl ([212.77.101.8])
  by mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 30 Mar 2011 14:39:21 +0200
Received: (wp-smtpd smtp.wp.pl 9744 invoked from network); 30 Mar 2011 14:39:18 +0200
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=wp.pl; s=1024a;
          t=1301488758; bh=7cxVDBmXRSi1spPGvH1ni3I7yqG6Nz2kPOTllKtgwHk=;
          h=From:To:Subject;
          b=Dnl+IhZ9gXmkQcITDxUtcju7m85qX3zGzDmRZG/4rIAZZwYV6rk9lmlKP/K0TnhwD
           yMlOrBAo1f12mw8JlKQlgDEBUOv1ElZBVAsDBD4HlQdpFwteImObPUwk/BtqyAE6iO
           uQGIoTCpJcpF6p/j3kmJ9m/IjUp0o6gYehhatfWI=
Received: from pfpleia.if.uj.edu.pl (HELO [149.156.90.26]) (d0@[149.156.90.26])
          (envelope-sender <d0@wp.pl>)
          by smtp.wp.pl (WP-SMTPD) with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP
          for <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>; 30 Mar 2011 14:39:18 +0200
Message-ID: <4D932456.4000803@wp.pl>
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 14:38:46 +0200
From: Dawid Toton <d0@wp.pl>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.14) Gecko/20110223 Thunderbird/3.1.8
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr
References: <74205EDF-69A3-479A-9214-52D2AB849558@gmail.com> <FEF49C8B-5952-4414-A65E-DA2B5DC87C31@ens-lyon.org> <13A708B2-732E-4D51-A740-BCFDC4E0212F@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <13A708B2-732E-4D51-A740-BCFDC4E0212F@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-WP-AV: skaner antywirusowy poczty Wirtualnej Polski S. A.
X-WP-SPAM: NO 0000000 [ccOU]                               
Subject: [Caml-list] Re: function that works on different record types, assuming they
 have a given field

On 03/28/2011 08:35 PM, Joel Reymont wrote:
> On Mar 28, 2011, at 7:34 PM, David Rajchenbach-Teller wrote:
>
>> you can obtain the same behavior by using objects instead of records:
> Yes, that used to work very well... until I was forced to switch to records :-).
>
When I had this problem I used one common record type:

type ('foo, 'bar') common =
  {foo : 'foo
  ;bar : 'bar
  ;x : int
  }

type with_bar = (unit, string) common
type with_foo = (double, unit) common

However, I can see that with more different independent types this is
going to be quite ugly.

Dawid