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 SAA17559; Mon, 11 Oct 2004 18:40:49 +0200 (MET DST) 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 SAA17697 for ; Mon, 11 Oct 2004 18:40:48 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from smtp.mbg.ocn.ne.jp (mbg.ocn.ne.jp [210.190.142.181]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id i9BGelDw019110 for ; Mon, 11 Oct 2004 18:40:47 +0200 Received: from localhost (p26153-adsau08doujib4-acca.osaka.ocn.ne.jp [221.190.232.153]) by smtp.mbg.ocn.ne.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB96978C2 for ; Tue, 12 Oct 2004 01:40:45 +0900 (JST) Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 01:40:18 +0900 (JST) Message-Id: <20041012.014018.74748925.yoriyuki@mbg.ocn.ne.jp> To: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] About Obj From: Yamagata Yoriyuki In-Reply-To: <200410111633.03459.jon@jdh30.plus.com> References: <16746.15832.409677.764564@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <416A8CDA.7060407@univ-savoie.fr> <200410111633.03459.jon@jdh30.plus.com> X-Mailer: Mew version 3.3 on Emacs 21.3 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 416AB78F.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Loop: caml-list@inria.fr X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 yamagata:01 yoriyuki:01 yoriyuki:01 caml-list:01 2004:99 yamagata:01 compiler:01 unsafe:01 unsafe:01 thread:02 external:03 recursive:03 obj:03 obj:03 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk From: Jon Harrop Subject: Re: [Caml-list] About Obj (was Recursive lists) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 16:33:03 +0100 > Yes, your Obj implementation is substantially bigger, more complicated, more > error prone and more costly on small lists. Just forget this whole thread > ever happened and consider using a different data structure. :-) > > Can Obj not be hidden so that people can't use it so easily? Yes, it would be nice to have a compiler option which disable all causes of the evil (Obj.magic, Array.unsafe_get, external etc). Then we can control where unsafe operations are used. -- Yamagata Yoriyuki ------------------- 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