From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from weis@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id SAA17673 for caml-red; Fri, 15 Dec 2000 18:56:46 +0100 (MET) Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id OAA04752 for ; Fri, 15 Dec 2000 14:39:43 +0100 (MET) Received: from mail.pi.se (mail.pi.se [195.7.64.8]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.10.0) with ESMTP id eBFDdfj22149; Fri, 15 Dec 2000 14:39:41 +0100 (MET) Received: from gateway ([195.7.85.166]) by mail.pi.se (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id OAA20639; Fri, 15 Dec 2000 14:39:26 +0100 (MET) From: "Mattias Waldau" To: , "Stefan Monnier" Cc: Subject: RE: Functions must be explicitly typed, (was Same label in different types, how do people solve this?) Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2000 14:39:08 +0100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <200012151247.NAA30942@pauillac.inria.fr> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: weis@pauillac.inria.fr >>> >>>>> "Mattias" == Mattias Waldau writes: >>> > I don't really see the use of infering types for functions. It works for one I was wrong! It is very nice to have type inference for local and anynomous functions. >> >> I would like to note that type inference (i.e. code without >> annotations) helps a lot when developing programs: the annotation free >> code is not only easier to write but also easier to maintain since it >> is kind of ``auto-adaptative'' and resistant to reorganisations and >> names modifications. If this were important, we shouldn't have different operators for * and *. I had to change a program from integers to float recently, and it isn't fun at all. /mattias