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 discorde.inria.fr (discorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.38]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E800BC0A for ; Sat, 16 Jun 2007 12:10:36 +0200 (CEST) Received: from an-out-0708.google.com (an-out-0708.google.com [209.85.132.241]) by discorde.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id l5GAAZxg000506 for ; Sat, 16 Jun 2007 12:10:36 +0200 Received: by an-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id b15so291332ana for ; Sat, 16 Jun 2007 03:10:35 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=QRso4PoURXZGFheYk7EI5nxeaR01jtlSqjKYqO52EQ7m3hlixyvV3omRitFl05TAtXFLI2WPu/6ZwOV3RJadJ0CuH6SvLx1xT4qs2gousqH/pNwmPM3B8+AIY5zfI+gKzwa/ldbNUpmskkjTCzUnjB4mqV92fj7z8whYBcJSo4w= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=PXk4HeWoJNxm6AHudfoWumASfyLoCathffkl1OyxEQRvN1OEJ9S07IFZOn8mZTZQSbrbVVHgS4ZgfQHkKa3fsJpz7j+ttziULRY1q3josckFbykeryXqbuWM8xtl7tG0SZ5fDil3KEx1PIOyFQkx97oEET3Li221VGXs1zVrL8w= Received: by 10.100.201.11 with SMTP id y11mr2353702anf.1181988635237; Sat, 16 Jun 2007 03:10:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.100.33.15 with HTTP; Sat, 16 Jun 2007 03:10:35 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <6f9f8f4a0706160310m285f0b63r7e2087a31ae46671@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2007 12:10:35 +0200 From: "Loup Vaillant" To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Not really a bug but... In-Reply-To: <46739188.5060605@inria.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <200706160117.45971.jon@ffconsultancy.com> <46739188.5060605@inria.fr> X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 4673B71B.000 on discorde : j-chkmail score : X : 0/20 1 0.000 -> 1 X-Miltered: at discorde with ID 4673B71B.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail . ensmp . fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; bug:01 frisch:01 frisch:01 semantics:01 literals:01 literals:01 abstractions:01 ocaml:01 mutable:01 usefull:01 wrote:01 caml-list:01 immutable:01 immutable:01 strings:01 2007/6/16, Alain Frisch : > Jon Harrop wrote: > > Any chance of changing the semantics of string literals so they aren't static? > [...] > If it were done automatically, there would be a penalty for > the common case of immutable strings; to avoid it, you'd need to lift > constant literals out of abstractions, which is not very nice. By the way, why Ocaml didn't take the Java path, i.e. making truly immutable strings, And provide mutable string buffers as well? Any chance of seing someone exploring that path? (Some usefull features would then be fast consing and catenation, and some easier string sharing). Loup