From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id IAA04174; Wed, 15 May 2002 08:46:41 +0200 (MET DST) Received: (from weis@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id IAA04171 for caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr; Wed, 15 May 2002 08:46:40 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id BAA31688 for ; Wed, 15 May 2002 01:29:59 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from laurelin.dementia.org ([208.167.88.73]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id g4ENTvn05260 for ; Wed, 15 May 2002 01:29:58 +0200 (MET DST) Received: (from jprevost@localhost) by laurelin.dementia.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g4ENYiU23979; Tue, 14 May 2002 19:34:44 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from visigoth@cs.cmu.edu) X-Authentication-Warning: laurelin.dementia.org: jprevost set sender to visigoth@cs.cmu.edu using -f To: Markus Mottl Cc: Jacques Garrigue , caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Turning off type-checking References: <20020513133102.GB9777@kiefer.ai.univie.ac.at> <20020514233326Q.garrigue@kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp> <20020514231719.GA21332@fichte.ai.univie.ac.at> From: John Prevost Date: 14 May 2002 19:34:43 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20020514231719.GA21332@fichte.ai.univie.ac.at> Message-ID: <86ptzyb8x8.fsf@laurelin.dementia.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk >>>>> "mm" == Markus Mottl writes: mm> I don't think that I really hit the exponential wall anywhere mm> so it's probably just that type-checking takes much longer mm> than I had expected. Well, I can live with it... Note that it's not type-checking that's painful so much as type reconstruction. If it were possible to provide O'Caml with an explicitly typed representation, simply checking the types should be quite easy. (Is it well typed? Is it not well typed?) Type reconstruction, on the other hand, requires term unification and the like, and takes a bit more effort. How hard would it be (probably difficult) to expose an explicitly typed layer from the system for automatic code generators? John. ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners