On 22/02/07, David Teller <David.Teller@ens-lyon.org> wrote:
Now, unless I'm mistaken, OCaml's design is mostly towards structural
typing. Usually, when one wants nominal typing, one resorts to abstract
types safely hidden in modules. From this point of view, nominal typing
of records is therefore somewhat surprising.
In general, there is a problem with structural (sub)typing... Although it seems better and in all ways superior to nominal (sub)typing from the theoretical point of view, practically, it is... slow. (At least when compared to nominal (sub)typing).
- Tom