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=1.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,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 mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.82]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE376BBC1 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 16:55:18 +0100 (CET) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgAAACyhskfAXQImh2dsb2JhbACQPQEBAQgKKZZBhiQ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.25,347,1199660400"; d="scan'208";a="8030696" Received: from discorde.inria.fr ([192.93.2.38]) by mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 13 Feb 2008 16:55:16 +0100 Received: from mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.105]) by discorde.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id m1DFtAJc029285 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=OK) for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 16:55:16 +0100 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgAAAGyhskdA6aq4mWdsb2JhbACQPQEBAQEBBgQECwgYlkGGJA X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.25,347,1199660400"; d="scan'208";a="22587993" Received: from rn-out-0910.google.com ([64.233.170.184]) by mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 13 Feb 2008 16:55:15 +0100 Received: by rn-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id e24so90257rng.6 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 07:55:15 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; bh=BO1wWmTwruEEigTc+3meAdn/WWQwytyRuQnO6QoujME=; b=W43ccNmQ1hrknBpyDUFxILvw9BHNGvpmBJcC7zQtQ1hCAv4apmbFxGDjHhbnx3IXEHm9gQkVW84w7Jz9GH7Gx/OJvR1YSPSwVxT+obk4I12QI5J/jEDBZ4THgSUfbojJYMZcs91q9u1sa2zoJ/aV3/czMSJhfYFAY7VdxmM6mdI= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=O03/m2ijjsPRO7xssyPuJdSkuK7JZChMY+NGJC+NZ0NkGUiiulMgF/Qt0n+AxgkBsvZIebHDHhrg3LJxMzBJPRKEOiTfnHBYJ/3CAMe/eKg+yAL3u/BCTlO6Ob3++r5MbkxlxxKnq+0wGa+inGJfxTQYGKhBlDENPdXV4qbCr5g= Received: by 10.142.131.18 with SMTP id e18mr15063wfd.207.1202918114051; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 07:55:14 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.148.14 with HTTP; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 07:55:13 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4a051d930802130755n21e8f328t2ca5466e2150644@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 10:55:13 -0500 From: "Christopher L Conway" Sender: christopherleeconway@gmail.com To: "=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Mattias_Engdeg=E5rd?=" Subject: Re: [Caml-list] type unsoundness with constraints and polymorphic variants Cc: caml-list@inria.fr In-Reply-To: <20080213145328.B49EF81B3D@kicki.hq.vtech> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline References: <18352.43565.401296.820373@nyc-qws-r03.delacy.com> <20080212.132225.27792058.garrigue@math.nagoya-u.ac.jp> <47B17667.2090907@fmf.uni-lj.si> <20080213.170018.179955875.garrigue@math.nagoya-u.ac.jp> <4a051d930802130615l1b127f49md6e4f1c055de9238@mail.gmail.com> <80FA660E-FFEF-4499-A1B5-BAA72657E08E@cs.umd.edu> <9d3ec8300802130635va73a8adr3cfd4f50ed7e3394@mail.gmail.com> <20080213145328.B49EF81B3D@kicki.hq.vtech> X-Google-Sender-Auth: d3e85ebc40b05a6c X-Miltered: at discorde with ID 47B312DE.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail . ensmp . fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; variants:01 mattias:01 mattias:01 semantics:01 semantics:01 polymorphic:01 wrote:01 caml-list:01 semantic:02 constraints:03 programming:03 solid:95 chris:06 probably:07 missing:07 On Feb 13, 2008 9:53 AM, Mattias Engdeg=E5rd wrote: > >I would be very impressed if a student managed to write a full formal > >semantic in a summer. > > So would most people, but we may be missing the goal. A solid > understanding of the language for serious programming or even > independent reimplementation does not necessarily require formal > semantics. A careful prose description would probably do. A careful prose description is what I intended to propose. A true formal semantics is neither necessary nor sufficient. Chris