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 p7RGxxRp003386
	for <caml-list@sympa-roc.inria.fr>; Sat, 27 Aug 2011 18:59:59 +0200
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AtABADIiWU7RVdIpimdsb2JhbABCmGWPPwgUAQEBCgkNBxIGIYFAAQEBAQMSAiwBGx0BAwwGBQsDCi4eBAERAQUBHAYTIqNfCow7glWENTuIbQIDBoZGBItah0WMYTyDaQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.68,290,1312149600"; 
   d="scan'208";a="117396018"
Received: from mail-pz0-f41.google.com ([209.85.210.41])
  by mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-SHA; 27 Aug 2011 18:59:43 +0200
Received: by pzk4 with SMTP id 4so7296494pzk.14
        for <caml-list@inria.fr>; Sat, 27 Aug 2011 09:59:42 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:reply-to:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id
         :subject:from:to:cc:content-type;
        bh=huUipu2vINoXbqPYmR0O9F/YPS8pqeBguiOYVmXIuTE=;
        b=AVfiKlkcZ5H8R366uDEkyWdgf0la25u+jQ2TtwxB3OqyH1eISEjoMLz78gDg5ZBtYk
         BemYlB2Hd6/8D2Y0G+S2lPTHqO83tBCJIFVY5btvJwxOnrA5IMxmFAPiJR+mYq2MWNtT
         z04Nb0u3ErE7xPux1ow+YnN2L8YMBznNJ818w=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.142.11.5 with SMTP id 5mr704712wfk.248.1314464381955; Sat, 27
 Aug 2011 09:59:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.142.127.14 with HTTP; Sat, 27 Aug 2011 09:59:41 -0700 (PDT)
Reply-To: david.baelde@ens-lyon.org
In-Reply-To: <1314457588.3496.86.camel@thinkpad>
References: <4E58CCC3.4040901@gmail.com>
	<1314457588.3496.86.camel@thinkpad>
Date: Sat, 27 Aug 2011 18:59:41 +0200
Message-ID: <CAFqqUFG2Gqop7BqdSsm4Y5CHQ8KB1mG9J62=8hS9faqKJbtkfQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: David Baelde <david.baelde@gmail.com>
To: Gerd Stolpmann <info@gerd-stolpmann.de>
Cc: Chris Yocum <cyocum@gmail.com>, caml-list@inria.fr
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Ocaml and the Fragile Base Class Problem

On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 5:06 PM, Gerd Stolpmann <info@gerd-stolpmann.de> wrote:
> I think it is a non-issue in practice. Simply because inheritance is
> quite seldom in Ocaml, even in programs using a lot of OO features.

Perhaps the issue is the reason why we don't use more OO in OCaml?
That kind of problem did bit us once. It's particularly dangerous when
combined with recursive methods -- when you override, it breaks
recursion.

David