From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: weis Received: (from weis@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id OAA12333 for caml-redistribution; Thu, 25 Nov 1999 14:27:37 +0100 (MET) Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id LAA08520 for ; Thu, 25 Nov 1999 11:56:37 +0100 (MET) Received: from post.tepkom.ru (post.tepkom.ru [195.9.10.12]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA05068 for ; Thu, 25 Nov 1999 11:56:34 +0100 (MET) Received: (from msk@localhost) by post.tepkom.ru (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA26790 for caml-list@inria.fr.ANTIVIRUS; Thu, 25 Nov 1999 13:53:22 +0300 Received: from localhost (msk@localhost) by post.tepkom.ru (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA26777 for ; Thu, 25 Nov 1999 13:53:22 +0300 X-Authentication-Warning: post.tepkom.ru: msk owned process doing -bs Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 13:53:22 +0300 (MSK) From: Anton Moscal To: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: The option -rectypes In-Reply-To: <19991124215630.05496@pauillac.inria.fr> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: weis On Wed, 24 Nov 1999, Xavier Leroy wrote: > and attempts to use f later will fail with very strange type error > messages. We tried to put unrestricted recursive types in one of the > OCaml releases, and got many, many complains from users telling us > that this made the language much harder to use, especially for teaching. May be will be better to produce warning instead of error about recursive types, if no -rectypes specified? Regards, Anton Moscal