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 NAA25793; Sat, 18 Jan 2003 13:07:12 +0100 (MET) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f 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 NAA25082 for ; Sat, 18 Jan 2003 13:07:11 +0100 (MET) Received: from inria.fr (nas-cbv-8-62-147-158-252.dial.proxad.net [62.147.158.252]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id h0IC7Ar08432 for ; Sat, 18 Jan 2003 13:07:10 +0100 (MET) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 13:08:54 +0100 Subject: Re: [Caml-list] let rec Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v551) From: Damien Doligez To: caml-list@inria.fr Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: Message-Id: <9D69A846-2ADD-11D7-AFEF-0003930FCE12@inria.fr> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.551) Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk On Thursday, January 16, 2003, at 03:38 PM, Mike Potanin wrote: > The similar problem arises in a case > let ring l = let rec r = l@r in r > OCaml type system can not understand that the design is safe. But it is not unconditionally safe. Its safety depends on how you defined the @ function. O'Caml doesn't want to look at the definition of @ because separate compilation is a very important feature. -- Damien ------------------- 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