From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.82])
	by walapai.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id q2PMjv93018035
	for <caml-list@sympa-roc.inria.fr>; Mon, 26 Mar 2012 00:45:57 +0200
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AkQCAMqfb0/ZSMD4k2dsb2JhbABDuCYiAQEBAQkJCwkUAySCCQEBBAE6RAsLGAklDwEEDRs0iAUJt3iJcYQTgyQEmz2FVIdl
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.73,648,1325458800"; 
   d="scan'208";a="151141582"
Received: from fmmailgate07.web.de ([217.72.192.248])
  by mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 26 Mar 2012 00:45:25 +0200
Received: from moweb002.kundenserver.de (moweb002.kundenserver.de [172.19.20.108])
	by fmmailgate07.web.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D41FFA8EE2
	for <caml-list@inria.fr>; Mon, 26 Mar 2012 00:45:25 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from frosties.localnet ([95.208.118.96]) by smtp.web.de (mrweb002)
 with ESMTPA (Nemesis) id 0MTQ07-1Rjelu1uAZ-00SQnd; Mon, 26 Mar 2012 00:45:25
 +0200
Received: from mrvn by frosties.localnet with local (Exim 4.77)
	(envelope-from <goswin-v-b@web.de>)
	id 1SBwBg-0006eY-NX
	for caml-list@inria.fr; Mon, 26 Mar 2012 00:45:24 +0200
From: Goswin von Brederlow <goswin-v-b@web.de>
To: caml-list@inria.fr
References: <87fwcx6ejm.fsf@frosties.localnet>
	<CAJMfKEWjsCLOxv8qD9YE7DJjb7NUAO778DEXvM-ZkLA2r5nidg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJMfKEU80uhksOLOa3a44Ma-Uf1_ciRrfvo=E58YBe4q_fqxKQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJMfKEVuZvCv3ridDL00_H507cQE7KoDgi9YtL5pQdeG5T3Fow@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2012 00:45:24 +0200
In-Reply-To: <CAJMfKEVuZvCv3ridDL00_H507cQE7KoDgi9YtL5pQdeG5T3Fow@mail.gmail.com>
	(Lukasz Stafiniak's message of "Sat, 24 Mar 2012 19:42:10 +0100")
Message-ID: <87398wwb97.fsf@frosties.localnet>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.110009 (No Gnus v0.9) XEmacs/21.4.22 (linux, no MULE)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Provags-ID:  V02:K0:iyoFREi/VS36E5aheuPZtbCpE0vmfVv8ZWK5kFcBQpz
 PY2Ioz73fZMeru3Ym0KgVYZanjJ5hJjtRpmQUzVEfgCLtlhrh/
 nNJkO3NnRIAw7NG2mlm8eArmZ+sp/LmEWKwcKlh++PHLXPKQ7I
 ECoFIvKI15prV0kqzk/hd+lopJsaUm2tAiHMHAHPdRpTQfKvmB
 3aIEJWSYJxv2E9yMCe8gA==
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Wish: mutable variant types, equivalence with records

Lukasz Stafiniak <lukstafi@gmail.com> writes:

> On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 7:39 PM, Lukasz Stafiniak <lukstafi@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 7:32 PM, Lukasz Stafiniak <lukstafi@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I'm not sure about mutable but I'd appreciate labels :D
>>
>> As for syntax, I think that "unboxed anonymous records" would be better.
>
> For starters, one could make a Camlp4 extension that generates a
> record type named "typ_Variant" for a type "typ" and its constructor
> "Variant" whose fields are defined as a record. Hmm...

Yes please.

That wouldn't eliminate the risk of the two types getting out-of-sync
and save keystrokes.

> Record unboxing might be handled as an orthogonal issue?

MfG
        Goswin