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 pA4D3XgK032071 for ; Fri, 4 Nov 2011 14:03:34 +0100 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AhICALThs07RVaC2kGdsb2JhbABEhHqVWY8xCCIBAQEBCQkNBxQEIYFyAQEBAwESAg8dATgBAwELAQUFCw8CJgICIhIBBQEcIRqHYJd1CosNgyiFQoktAgUKgSaGZYEWBJQcjTo9gUmCJw X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.69,455,1315173600"; d="scan'208";a="116918474" Received: from mail-gy0-f182.google.com ([209.85.160.182]) by mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-SHA; 04 Nov 2011 14:03:33 +0100 Received: by gyd5 with SMTP id 5so2279031gyd.27 for ; Fri, 04 Nov 2011 06:03:32 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=Z1KhOo42R5nvbiuCpELB8jg7peRiiplCXc5rVnVroh0=; b=mVmEWf+TrQmj7RBbiWvTVR/az0eK5378fAcBLV9sqV3NQe2oqlYe8EzfIDxXHPKfGU sbeHr8XQ6soQrqcKb5GxsqnYmHeiqzuYFlo+K6VKycZrwo+rPThzie3UQX8Vu0CMsioU lJAb6P3TY/Og8F9rJXckPu4pMibS863pEnXIw= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.151.92.13 with SMTP id u13mr14814110ybl.83.1320411812702; Fri, 04 Nov 2011 06:03:32 -0700 (PDT) Sender: daniel.c.buenzli@gmail.com Received: by 10.147.128.14 with HTTP; Fri, 4 Nov 2011 06:03:32 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20111104134547.14475ul9wx5myyrk@ssl0.ovh.net> References: <7EB42100-0E5F-4FBB-8CB8-A318926F0E0E@x9c.fr> <3AFFA70C-BD82-4A7B-94E6-7FAB5BC93148@x9c.fr> <4EB2F67D.6070202@inria.fr> <20111104092409.GA22221@ccellier.rd.securactive.lan> <4D9C7FE8-98E1-4D36-90CE-BDEDA6607338@ocamlpro.com> <20111104134547.14475ul9wx5myyrk@ssl0.ovh.net> Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 14:03:32 +0100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: HUXgJCOJMe-tZ6WnmEiq6dir2k0 Message-ID: From: =?UTF-8?Q?Daniel_B=C3=BCnzli?= To: forum@x9c.fr Cc: caml-list@inria.fr Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Subject: Re: [Caml-list] [ANN] Argot: 1.0 release > I do agree that there is often not enough semantics in OCaml types, but > please notice that the order of arguments and whether the function is > currified is not relevant. Indeed, doing type search up to isomorphisms > allows to get rid of these details, Ha. I slipped the up to isomorphisms part. Quite cool indeed. Best, Daniel