From: "Frédéric Gava" <gava@univ-paris12.fr>
To: <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>
Cc: "Jon Harrop" <jon@ffconsultancy.com>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] (int * int) <> int*int ?
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 22:36:34 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <00f001c638c1$380da620$1f570b50@mshome.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200602232058.59170.jon@ffconsultancy.com>
>Only historical reasons, AFAIK. I do not believe this is necessary or that
>there is a logical reason for doing so.
Peraps. I do not know. Peraps also to keep safe old programs...
>I also believe that statement was wrong but I don't think you have provided
>counter-examples because the run-time representations are the same for the
>different types that you cite (rather than the converse).
I just want to say that in or char have the same representation but
different types (contraposition)
>Also, note that this behaviour does not appear with polymorphic variants,
>where int * int <=> (int * int):
># type t = A of int * int | B of (int * int);;
>type t = A of int * int | B of (int * int)
># type t = [ `A of int * int | `B of (int * int) ];;
>type t = [ `A of int * int | `B of int * int ]
>I assume the arguments of a polymorphic variant are always boxed...
This is why you could not have more than 255 constructor in concrete
variants and many more in polymorphic ones.
FG
prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-02-23 21:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-02-23 17:28 Frédéric Gava
2006-02-23 18:33 ` [Caml-list] " Eric Cooper
2006-02-23 19:03 ` Martin Jambon
2006-02-23 19:07 ` Frédéric Gava
2006-02-23 20:15 ` Brian Hurt
2006-02-23 21:30 ` Frédéric Gava
2006-02-23 21:57 ` Brian Hurt
2006-02-23 22:30 ` Frédéric Gava
2006-02-23 22:50 ` Brian Hurt
2006-02-23 23:07 ` Frédéric Gava
2006-02-24 8:38 ` Alessandro Baretta
2006-02-24 12:59 ` Damien Doligez
2006-02-23 18:33 ` Thomas Fischbacher
2006-02-23 18:56 ` David Brown
2006-02-23 19:24 ` Frédéric Gava
2006-02-23 19:37 ` Frédéric Gava
2006-02-23 19:45 ` Frédéric Gava
2006-02-24 0:01 ` Jacques Garrigue
2006-02-24 0:18 ` Lukasz Stafiniak
2006-02-24 2:17 ` Jacques Garrigue
2006-02-24 13:07 ` Alain Frisch
2006-02-25 17:42 ` Vincent Balat
2006-02-25 18:30 ` Nicolas Pouillard
2006-02-25 19:09 ` Richard Jones
2006-03-01 12:48 ` Nicolas Pouillard
2006-02-25 23:17 ` Christophe TROESTLER
2006-03-01 13:01 ` Nicolas Pouillard
2006-02-27 11:14 ` camlp4 renovation [was: [Caml-list] (int * int) <> int*int ?] Hendrik Tews
2006-02-24 13:39 ` [Caml-list] (int * int) <> int*int ? Nicolas Cannasse
2006-02-24 14:49 ` Frédéric Gava
2006-02-24 8:27 ` also for tagged records? [Was: Re: [Caml-list] (int * int) <> int*int ?] Sebastian Egner
2006-02-24 14:01 ` Thomas Fischbacher
2006-02-23 20:58 ` [Caml-list] (int * int) <> int*int ? Jon Harrop
2006-02-23 21:36 ` Frédéric Gava [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='00f001c638c1$380da620$1f570b50@mshome.net' \
--to=gava@univ-paris12.fr \
--cc=caml-list@yquem.inria.fr \
--cc=jon@ffconsultancy.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox