From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.105]) by walapai.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id q2OIdOtE026081 for ; Sat, 24 Mar 2012 19:39:24 +0100 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AosBAHoTbk9KfVK2kGdsb2JhbABEuBkIIgEBAQEJCQ0HFAQjggkBAQEEEgIsARsdAQMMBgULDS4hAQERAQUBHAYTIodomxUKjBaCcYQrP4h2AQULiWaHNwSVYIsxgx09hAo X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.73,642,1325458800"; d="scan'208";a="137565704" Received: from mail-we0-f182.google.com ([74.125.82.182]) by mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-SHA; 24 Mar 2012 19:39:20 +0100 Received: by wern13 with SMTP id n13so5639742wer.27 for ; Sat, 24 Mar 2012 11:39:20 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=vl9HFTeCL68/TiwdM0Plnsze/I3+PrMaXTesenNEWvs=; b=fnGAUAulAcp1iPrs45udnwl8p/OH4Ch0LkoB+yKpc6XaAYnDHY9qKNyNih4shzEnvQ iiVkTbcsmRlDFn1J+jj04sTFaLP9qEkjsWx3RGlUQb7k7wbNU4pM4MTV1xWZKcU/O6nl EfdOGUGXjcHHxsC/2FJaX24Cxh8h1sJdtOqZw0my7TCewO/9sRsR9ViPqRTMaCv2702y rpwQkJEwGJhsaQjKqpJlS7a9LuhX53q5hn/vzqaJRMGsXMMnzKr0KgHd07RuOMvi/m4p jqUMfldx5a7tG8v1Pl3Gps3eXyQcVyzfLPQmGktpxgqxuHbbg5bUHfnRletv4MfyBbLf 6UYA== Received: by 10.180.101.72 with SMTP id fe8mr6496637wib.4.1332614360404; Sat, 24 Mar 2012 11:39:20 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.180.19.97 with HTTP; Sat, 24 Mar 2012 11:39:00 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <87fwcx6ejm.fsf@frosties.localnet> From: Lukasz Stafiniak Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2012 19:39:00 +0100 Message-ID: To: Goswin von Brederlow Cc: caml-list@inria.fr Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Wish: mutable variant types, equivalence with records On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 7:32 PM, Lukasz Stafiniak 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.