explicit_arity is an ugly hack. It is used by camlp[45] (whose revised
syntax has a superior currified constructor-parameter syntax and is
thus never confused about arities) to convert its internal AST into
the OCaml parse tree. It is not meant to be used by end-users, only by
camlp5 as a code-producing tool.
You ask why this was not extended to polymorphic variant. There was no
need, so nobody worked on it. Besides, I suspect making polymorphic
variant more complex is a bad idea -- and am quite certain relying on
an attribute there is a bad idea.
On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 10:04 AM, Jordan W <jordojw@gmail.com> wrote:
> My understanding was that this "explicit_arity" attribute allows precisely
> that - the capability to implement a specific syntax to distinguish between
> multiple arguments and just one argument (that may coincidentally be a
> tuple). My question is why this capability is not extended to polymorphic
> variants in the same way it has been extended to standard variant types.
>
> On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 12:03 AM, Jacques Garrigue
> <garrigue@math.nagoya-u.ac.jp> wrote:
>>
>> The answer is simple: polymorphic variants can only accept one argument
>> (which may of course be a tuple). The other behavior would have required
>> a specific syntax for multi-parameter polymorphic variants, since there is
>> no information associated to the constructor for them.
>>
>> Jacques Garrigue
>>
>> On 2015/01/23 15:53, Jordan W wrote:
>> >
>> > The OCaml compiler allows distinguishing between variants that accept a
>> > single tuple and variant types that accept several parameters. What looks
>> > like a variant type accepting a tuple, is actually the later:
>> >
>> > type x = TwoSeparateArguments of int * int
>> > let tuple = (10,10)
>> > let thisWontWork = TwoSeparateArguments tuple;;
>> > >> Error: The constructor TwoSeparateArguments expects 2 argument(s),
>> > >> but is applied here to 1 argument(s)
>> >
>> > (* Notice the extra parens around the two ints *)
>> > type x = OneArgumentThatIsATuple of (int * int)
>> > let thisActuallyWorks = OneArgumentThatIsATuple tuple
>> >
>> > The extra parens distinguish at type definition time which of the two is
>> > intended.
>> >
>> > But OCaml does some automatic massaging of the data that you supply to
>> > constructor values.
>> > let _ = OneArgumentThatIsATuple (4, 5)
>> > let _ = TwoSeparateArguments (4, 5)
>> >
>> > No extra parens are required in this case. But OCaml does give you the
>> > ability to annotate patterns and expressions with an "explicit_arity"
>> > attribute which allows syntactic distinction between supplying two separate
>> > parameters vs. one that happens to be a tuple. This is important for other
>> > parser extensions that wish to treat the two distinctly. What OCaml allows
>> > (explicit_arity attribute) works well enough.
>> >
>> > The only problem is that there doesn't seem to be a way to utilize the
>> > same explicit_arity attributes with polymorphic variants. Such attributes
>> > are not acknowledged by the type system. Is this intended?
>> >
>> > Taking a quick look at typecore.ml, explicit_arity appears to be
>> > acknowledged on standard constructors but not polymorphic variants.
>> >
>> > https://github.com/ocaml/ocaml/blob/6e85c2d956c8fd5b45acd70a27586e44bb3a3119/typing/typecore.ml
>> >
>> > It seems these should be brought to consistency. I will file a mantis
>> > issue unless anyone believes this is intended.
>> >
>> > Thank you in advance.
>> >
>> > Jordan
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>