I think I share Maxence's concerns insofar as if someone polled me on what the example expressions should mean, I would intuitively make the opposite choices from the ones proposed. But whatever happens I won't be profoundly upset :)

On 9 March 2015 at 14:27, Leo White <leo@lpw25.net> wrote:

> If I understand, you mean that
> type t = int * int [@foo] * int
> would be rejected and we use instead:
> type t = int * (int [@foo]) * int
>
> Again, it's really not natural to me.

I haven't looked at the patch closely, but it seems roughly consistent
with how "as 'a" is handled. This makes sense to me, since in both
cases you are attaching additional information to the type.

Regards,

Leo

--
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