From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.105]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08AB9BC6B for ; Thu, 8 Nov 2007 19:23:43 +0100 (CET) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgAAAGDjMkfAXQImh2dsb2JhbACPAQEBAQgKKQ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.21,391,1188770400"; d="scan'208";a="19083869" Received: from discorde.inria.fr ([192.93.2.38]) by mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 08 Nov 2007 19:23:42 +0100 Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104]) by discorde.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id lA8INgQw004413 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=OK) for ; Thu, 8 Nov 2007 19:23:42 +0100 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgAAANTiMkdCbwQZnmdsb2JhbACPAQEBAQEHBAYp X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.21,391,1188770400"; d="scan'208";a="5596942" Received: from out1.smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.25]) by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 08 Nov 2007 19:23:41 +0100 Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.internal [10.202.2.42]) by out1.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26A1244AD1 for ; Thu, 8 Nov 2007 13:23:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from heartbeat2.messagingengine.com ([10.202.2.161]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 08 Nov 2007 13:23:40 -0500 X-Sasl-enc: DFJJ3PaQCwvjPGxNkbOkqQ++DVTNOeYZJlkMtCjxvbe9 1194546219 Received: from [192.168.1.11] (AMontsouris-753-1-8-165.w90-2.abo.wanadoo.fr [90.2.132.165]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94777293E1 for ; Thu, 8 Nov 2007 13:23:39 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2007 19:23:33 +0100 (CET) From: Martin Jambon X-X-Sender: martin@martin.ec.wink.com To: caml-list Subject: Re: Feature request (was Re: [Caml-list] Search for the smallest possible possible Ocaml segfault....) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <9d3ec8300711080617g1b023711o1a8f9aa50b7874@mail.gmail.com> <473333D0.3040807@frisch.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Miltered: at discorde with ID 4733542E.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail . ensmp . fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; ens-lyon:01 ocaml:01 segfault:01 pervasives:01 segfault:01 ocaml:01 2007,:98 beginners:01 wrote:01 caml-list:01 jambon:01 jambon:01 suggesting:02 segmentation:03 segmentation:03 On Thu, 8 Nov 2007, Martin Jambon wrote: > I think that the standard library should provide a Pervasives.segfault > function. Of course, this is a joke. I don't want to advertise against OCaml since I'm making a living out of it like many of us on this list. The meaning is really that in OCaml it is simply impossible to get segmentation faults. My joke was about suggesting a way of making it much easier for beginners to trigger segmentation faults because they may miss them sometimes if they are used to other inferior tools. Martin -- http://wink.com/profile/mjambon http://martin.jambon.free.fr