From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id RAA13264; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 17:15:28 +0100 (MET) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f 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 RAA09418 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 17:15:26 +0100 (MET) Received: from megs23.100mwh.com ([205.214.86.13]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id i08GFP528921 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2004 17:15:25 +0100 (MET) Received: from [205.214.86.158] (helo=uaapc442) by megs23.100mwh.com with asmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1Aecoc-0003r6-6g; Thu, 08 Jan 2004 09:15:22 -0700 Cc: caml-list@inria.fr To: Richard Jones Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Reason why 'for' doesn't work across floats? References: <20040108141152.GA19714@redhat.com> <20040108150358.GA6893@roke.freak> <20040108154759.GA22093@redhat.com> Message-ID: From: Artem Prisyznuk Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=koi8-r MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2004 18:15:21 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20040108154759.GA22093@redhat.com> User-Agent: Opera7.23/Win32 M2 build 3227 X-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - megs23.100mwh.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - inria.fr X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - sit.kiev.ua X-Loop: caml-list@inria.fr X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 floats:01 artem:01 2004:99 artem:01 ocaml:01 string:03 wrote:03 types:03 'for':95 'for':95 0000,:05 type:07 defined:07 thu:08 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk On Thu, 8 Jan 2004 15:47:59 +0000, Richard Jones wrote: >> One would need "for.", which doesn't seem appealing. > > Perhaps 'a -> 'a -> 'a ? > > Is this much different from the generic-but-not-really < operator in > OCaml? Operator '<' - defined on any types, it's really polymorph operator. But operator 'for' not has sences on string type. -- Artem Prysyznuk tema@sit.kiev.ua ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners