On 10/07/2013 17:02, John Carr wrote:

A function with an unconstrained type variable on the right hand side
of its type can potentially take an unlimited number of arguments.

You have the equivalent of a shift-reduce conflict in a grammar.  The
compiler can choose to reduce (apply f to the argument) or shift (save
the arguments waiting for more).  The choice to shift seems odd but
there may be a situation where it is useful.

If your function were defined

let f ~a = a + 0

it would be monomorphic. The compiler would match an unlabeled argument
with parameter a.

That is to say :
# let f ~a = a + 0;;
val f : a:int -> int = <fun>
# f 12;;
- : int = 12

Please, can someone explain the reason behind the following behaviour:


# let f ~a = a;;
val f : a:'a -> 'a = <fun>

if I apply function f, omiting the label, instead of an error I'll get:

# f 12;;
- : a:(int -> 'a) -> 'a = <fun>

... a function that accepts a labeled arguments, that is a function from int
to 'a, and returns a result of this function:

# f 12 ~a:(fun x -> x + 1);;
- : int = 13

and even more, if I apply it to more unlabled arguments:

# f 1 2 3 4 5;;
- : a:(int -> int -> int -> int -> int -> 'a) -> 'a = <fun>

It is very confusing...

-- 
Caml-list mailing list.  Subscription management and archives:
https://sympa.inria.fr/sympa/arc/caml-list
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs