From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Sympa-To: caml-list@inria.fr
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 p3SMukvf025393
	for <caml-list@sympa-roc.inria.fr>; Fri, 29 Apr 2011 00:56:46 +0200
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AjgCALbvuU3RVaE2kGdsb2JhbACleQgUAQEBAQkJDQcUBCGqSYp8gieFMDSIXgEBAwaFcASOXIgIgiI7g0I
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.64,283,1301868000"; 
   d="scan'208";a="107028778"
Received: from mail-fx0-f54.google.com ([209.85.161.54])
  by mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-SHA; 29 Apr 2011 00:56:41 +0200
Received: by fxm11 with SMTP id 11so4486233fxm.27
        for <caml-list@inria.fr>; Thu, 28 Apr 2011 15:56:41 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date
         :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type;
        bh=/IyRz8ImUTq9UFj9d3ItXD/bKJ4R8csY15SS2Xu941c=;
        b=tqw0RViHlJoBHZSFXASP2MJPfDu/AVndj1JgANKiQ1TCff85Aq+WyikiW8fRWXNVAN
         1fejjSWc5ljGRRw/bcuvf6/afRN6R7aWoBnaCeXjqRZpNM3drCm/rOqcLdYFoJGqac6X
         bKwesECg6WdJItpIdL26BSEQns3T3fkJfuQZM=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :cc:content-type;
        b=YJeoJpjNndAQokmlcBSQ3+CsosGrWwKi99hwbsFhDFcN69Rbxx7QdaaspGQw5djFvx
         46ge8wn+fZCq1dUf3R5omcLL8dFq/4KNzQs+N+gXaxN3ht+N+vNogBLUak15wJNr2UaR
         Ttr29ftAyXBqyxiMM6EHoJT6OZpeylKAf0IXQ=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.223.148.147 with SMTP id p19mr521881fav.140.1304031401241;
 Thu, 28 Apr 2011 15:56:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.223.96.197 with HTTP; Thu, 28 Apr 2011 15:56:41 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <2E33DAF4-C496-41ED-9208-61E66BD1AB82@gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTi=55g=rwiRm03_eS=uyGGDCoi4ezg@mail.gmail.com>
	<2E33DAF4-C496-41ED-9208-61E66BD1AB82@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 18:56:41 -0400
Message-ID: <BANLkTimg6eaBxSrfO1ZHPEOcxxoOarF5aQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Ethan Burns <burns.ethan@gmail.com>
To: Vincent Aravantinos <vincent.aravantinos@gmail.com>
Cc: caml-list@inria.fr
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Validation-by: burns.ethan@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Comparing variant types

On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 5:07 PM, Vincent Aravantinos
<vincent.aravantinos@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> without entering any details, probably the following links would be
> interesting to you:
>
> http://ocaml.janestreet.com/?q=node/33
> http://ocaml.janestreet.com/?q=node/35

Thanks for the links.  Actually, I think that understand OCaml's
polymorphic comparison and how to get rid of it (for the most part). I
guess that I just found it surprising that the compiler doesn't seem
to optimize it away in this case (a variant type used as an
enumeration with only simple constructors).  I suppose that one
solution would be to just use let-bindings to associate integers with
names "by hand" instead of using the variant type.  I don't really
like that approach too much, however.


Ethan